Karri Venkata Reddy Vs the State of Ap

KARRI VENKATA R E DDY, S/O LATE SRI TIRAPA REDD Y , AGE 61 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O DOOR NO. 1-70/1, KOMA R IPALEM - 533 346, BICCAVOL E MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRI C T

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION A ND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEP T ., A.P. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, VELAGAPUDI - 522 237.

¶13

THE DIRECTOR OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, ANDHRA PRADESH, MGM C A PITAL BUILDING, BESIDE NTR VAI D YA SEVA TRUST, MANGALA G IRI - 522 503, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶14

TIRUPATI MUNICIP A L CORPORATION, TIRUPATI - 517 5 01, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIO N ER,

¶15

SRI A RAMAKRISH N A NAIDU, S/O SRI GOVINDU NAI D U, R/O DOOR NO. 5-264, BHARATHAM MITTA, PAKALA - 517 112, TIRUPATI DISTRICT

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayin g that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ order or direction, more particularly one i n the nature of Writ of Mandamus or an y other appropriate Writ, declaring the letter of the 2nd respondent vide Lr.R o c No. 19024(31 )/144/2023-ATR RG N - DOTCP,

¶18

2

¶19

Dated 18-04-2024 addressed to 1st respondent Government in pursuance of its Memo No.2331918/12/2023, Dated 22-03-2024, whereby and where under the unutilized 166 TDR Bonds (certificates) issued by the Tirupati Municipal Corporation have been blocked in the TDR portal and kept them in abeyance as illegal. arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and suffers from non application of mind and consequently set aside the order of blocking and keeping in abeyance of the TDR Bond issued by the 3rd respondent in favour of the petitioner vide TDR certificate bearing No. 1012/00344/TDR/PCE/2023, Dated 07-08-2023 for construction purpose and pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the 2^nd respondent vide Lr.Roc operation of letter addressed by the 2^nd respondent No.19024(31)/144/2023-ATR RGN - DOTCP, Dated 18-042024 to the 1st respondent Government in pursuance of its Memo No. 2331918/12/2023, Dated 22-03-2024, where under the TDR certificate bearing No. 1012/00344/TDR/PCE/2023, Dated 07-08-2023 issued by the 3rd respondent in favour of the petitioner was blocked and kept in abeyance, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.N SIVA REDDY

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In

¶26

2.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

3

¶29

ORDER:-

¶30

The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the 2^nd respondent in issuing the TDR bond for the property of the petitioner, which was transferred by way of a registered gift deed dated 20.12.2022. The petitioner has purchased the property from the 4^th respondent, and it is stated that the vendor of the petitioner had executed a gift deed in favour of the 3rd respondent for an extent of 1385.44 square meters, and was issued a TDR certificate dated 07.08.2023 for an extent of 5541.759 square meters. It is submitted that the petitioner purchased the TDR bond from the 4^th respondent for a valuable sale consideration and paid an amount of Rs.27,00,000/- to the 4^th respondent. As things stood thus, the 1^st respondent issued a memo dated 22.03.2024. By the said memo, the 1^st respondent issued a blanket order directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to keep in abeyance the TDR bonds issued.

¶31

The learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that an enquiry was ordered into certain TDR bonds as complaints were received regarding the issuance of TDR bonds without any gift deeds being executed in favour of the Municipality. It is also submitted that an enquiry was ordered to ascertain the entitlement and ratio of the TDR bonds. It is submitted that the enquiry has been completed and the report has been submitted to the Government.

¶32

4

¶33

It is submitted that the petitioner’s TDR bond dated 07.08.2023 also forms part of the said enquiry, and as such, it is submitted that the outcome of the enquiry report shall have a bearing on the claim of the petitioner. The submission that the enquiry has been concluded was made before this Court on 23.09.2025, and time was sought on 07.10.2025, 14.10.2025, and 23.10.2025 for submitting a copy of the report.

¶34

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court has considered the case of a similarly placed person in W.P. No.11989 of 2024 and that a similar order may be passed in the present case.

¶35

The learned Government Pleader submits that the earlier order passed in W.P. No.11989 of 2024 does not refer to the enquiry report and that the case of the petitioner therein was directed to be considered independently without reference to the enquiry.

¶36

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶37

The case of the petitioner can be considered by the respondents by verifying the genuineness of the gift deed dated 20.12.2022 and ascertaining the utilization of the gifted portion of the land. This exercise shall be completed by the 3^rd respondent within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to ascertaining the genuineness of the execution of the gift deed and the existence of the property gifted by the petitioner, there shall be a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner

¶38

5

¶39

to utilize the TDR bond bearing No.1012/00344/TDR/PCE/2023 dated 07.08.2023.

¶40