THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.12101 of 2015

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed declaring the action of respondent No.1 in imposing condition No.8 in Letter No.9200/ORRGC/Plg/ H/2009, dated 07.04.2014 directing the petitioners to obtain ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the District Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer as per Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006, notified vide G.O.Ms.No.1537, M.A. dated 19.10.2006, as illegal arbitrary and contrary to Law.

2. Heard Ms.B.Madhavi, learned counsel representing Sri K.Laxmaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners on record and Sri V.Narasimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 (HMDA).

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.1 represented that the issue involved in the writ petition is squarely covered by the orders Patnaik and others v. Hyderabad Urban Development “As we have confirmed the common order dated 28.04.2010, we are inclined to dispose of writ petitions as follows:

(a) It shall be competent for the Urban Development Authorities or the Local Authorities, as the case may be, to insist on submission of clearance/permission under the 2006 Act as a condition precedent for releasing of layouts, and (b) the land has been put to non-agricultural use before the 2006 Act came into force, such clearance/permission shall not insisted.

(c) Conversion of land into Non-agricultural use under the provisions of Act 3 of 2006 is necessary even if the land is covered by master Plan and sanction of layout by the Development Authority under the provisions of Act 1 of 1975.”

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 would submit that in view of the aforesaid order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, the petitioners have to submit NALA certificate and therefore, the writ petition is liable to be disposed of 5. Learned Counsel for petitioners did not dispute the submissions of learned Standing Counsel that the order passed by the Division Bench, squarely applies to the present writ petition.

1 2016(3) ALD 600 (DB)

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of K.Satyananda Patnaik (cited supra). There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Date: 15.09.2025 Note: Registry is directed to annex A copy of the order passed by the

B/o.tk