THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO.21570 OF 2023

O R D E R

In this Writ Petition, the petitioners are seeking a declaration that the action of the 3^rd respondent in according building permission to the unofficial respondent for construction of building in the petitioners’ land in H.No.6-44/A admeasuring 308 square yards situated at Thangallapalli Village and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District vide proceedings No.304/BP/2023 dt.17.05.2023, is illegal and arbitrary and consequently to set aside the same and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are that the petitioners claim to be owners of the subject plot. It is stated that the subject plot was purchased by the petitioners’ father from one Kodam Chennappagari Hanumanthu on 01.03.1980 and he was also declared as its owner and possessor vide judgment and decree in O.S.No.809 of 1992 on the file of the Court of District Munisiff, Sircilla. It is stated that thereafter, the father of the petitioners applied for permission for construction and permission was accorded on 07.11.1992 and he also made construction. Thereafter, the petitioners’

father died intestate on 02.04.1999 and the petitioners being one of the legal heirs have inherited the property and all the legal heirs are in possession of the property. It is submitted that while the matters stood thus, the unofficial respondent has filed O.S.No.157 of 2020 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla claiming to be owner of the property and seeking injunction against the petitioners herein. It is stated that thereafter, the unofficial respondent has applied for building permission and the same was granted and therefore, the petitioners have sought information under the Right to Information Act as to how building permission was granted to the unofficial respondent and it was informed that on the basis of the legal opinion obtained from Government Pleaders, the building permission has been granted to the unofficial respondent. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is a decree in favour of the petitioners’ father holding him to be the owner and possessor of the subject property and the said decree has not been set aside and on the basis of some opinion given by Government Pleaders, the respondent Gram Panchayat has granted permission which is illegal and arbitrary.

4. At the time of admission on 10.08.2023, this Court had granted interim direction to the 3^rd respondent to forthwith stop construction activity, if any, undertaken by the 4^th respondent pursuant to the building permission dt.17.05.2023.

5. Respondents 3 and 4 have filed their counter affidavits along with stay vacate petition in I.A.No.1 of 2025 filed by the 4^th respondent.

6. According to the counter of the 3^rd respondent, they have obtained legal opinion of Government Pleaders and on the basis of the legal opinion, the permission has been granted to the 4^th respondent.

7. The 4^th respondent has filed the counter affidavit claiming himself to be the owner of the subject property.

8. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the official respondents are required to look into the documents of the applicant before taking a decision on the said application. They cannot take the opinion of Government Pleaders to come to the conclusion about the ownership or otherwise of the applicant over the subject property. The petitioners claim to be owners by virtue of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.809 of 1992 on the file of the file of the District Munisiff, Sircilla and the respondents did not show that the said judgment and decree has been set aside by any of the higher forum. The other suit filed by the unofficial respondent, i.e., O.S.No.157 of 2020 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla is only for injunction and not for declaration of title. Theref