ORDER : Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, J. Writ Petition No.15781 of 2015 is filed to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the entry in Column No.20 of TSLR of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, showing the land to an extent of 600 square meters in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village as meant for municipal park, as illegal and unsustainable in view of orders dated 05.07.1993 passed by the Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Special Court’) in LGC.No.146 of 1989 and for consequential direction. 2. Writ Petition No.8795 of 2018 is filed to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of respondent No.1 vide No.VRC/ C-10A/CZ/TPS/GHMC/2010-17/58, dated 18.09.2017 as illegal, arbitrary and amounts to contempt of Court and to set aside the same and also for consequential direction to the respondents to delete the entry in Column No.20 of TSLR of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, showing the land admeasuring 600 square meters in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village as meant for municipal park and for incorporation of names of the petitioners to enable them to utilize the said property. 3. Heard Sri Vedula Srininvas, learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 4 and Sri Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 3. 4. Since the issues and subject property involved in both the Writ Petitions are one and the same, and the result is interconnected, both the Writ Petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by common order. 5. For convenience, Writ Petition No.15781 of 2015 is taken as a lead case insofar as the facts are concerned. 6. 4. Since the issues and subject property involved in both the Writ Petitions are one and the same, and the result is interconnected, both the Writ Petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by common order. 5. For convenience, Writ Petition No.15781 of 2015 is taken as a lead case insofar as the facts are concerned. 6. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ affidavit, are that originally, Hidayat Ali Mirza and others were owners of Plot No.2 admeasuring 600 square meters in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village and Mandal, Hyderabad; that Mirza Mohammed Khasim and Ameer Bee purchased the same under registered sale deed vide document bearing No.1097/1964 and they in turn sold the same to Bimala Prasad Mandal under sale deed No.95/1980, dated 21.01.1980 and the petitioners purchased the same from Bimala Prasad Mandal under sale deed vide document bearing No.1895/2008, dated 13.08.2008; that Sri Venkataramana Co–Operative Housing Society filed LGC.No.146 of 1989 before the Special Court, seeking to declare Bimala Prasad Mandal and two others as ‘land grabbers’ as they occupied the open space on 12.08.1989 and further, contended that the said society has purchased an extent of Acs.5.20 of land in Sy.No.260 (old No.129/2-12) of Shaikpet Village, obtained an approved layout from the GHMC on 19.09.1962 and plots forming part of the layout were allotted to the members of the society and the society has gifted an open space of the layout in favour of the GHMC, vide gift deed dated 29.08.1969; that the said LGC was contested by Bimala Prasad Mandal, by contending that the subject property does not form part of Sy.No.260 and the layout sanctioned in favour of Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society has nothing to do with the land in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village, wherein the subject property is situated. The Special Court adjudicated the matter and vide its judgment dated 05.07.1993 dismissed the said LGC. Aggrieved by the same, the GHMC filed Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993 and the same was disposed of on 31.08.2004 with observation that no grounds are made to interfere with the findings of the Special Court. However, it was made clear that any aggrieved party may proceed in accordance with law with regard to land in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village. 6.1. However, it was made clear that any aggrieved party may proceed in accordance with law with regard to land in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village. 6.1. It is further averred that in view of the judgment of the Special Court in LGC.No.146 of 1989, which was confirmed by this Court in Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993, the subject land does not form part of the layout obtained by Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society and therefore, the GHMC is not entitled to use the same for park. It is further averred that treating the subject land as meant for municipal park basing on entry in Town Survey Land Register (TSLR) is erroneous and same ought to have been corrected. 6.2. It is further averred that the petitioners with an intention to raise construction on subject land, have applied for issuance of NOC from the District Collector, Hyderabad, who called for remarks from the Tahsildar, Khairatabad and the RDO, Secunderabad Division, who reported that though the subject land is shown as ‘municipal park’ in Column No.20 of TSLR, in view of the judgment of the Special Court in LGC.No.146 of 1989, as confirmed by this Court in Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993, the GMCH will not have any right over the same; that the District Collector addressed letter dated 23.01.2010 requesting the Commissioner, GHMC to inform as to whether the GHMC has any interest in respect of the subject land and whether the request of the petitioners for issuance of NOC can be considered, but, the GHMC has not replied to the said letter; and that the District Collector has not issued NOC to the petitioners, as such, they are not able to apply for permission for construction. 6.3. 6.3. It is further averred that when GHMC authorities were proceeding to demolish the structures in the subject land, the vendor of the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.6085 of 2008 before this Court and this Court by order dated 19.03.2008 granted an order of status quo, however, subsequently, the said Writ Petition was dismissed on 22.09.2010 for non- prosecution; that coming to know about the same, the petitioners filed two applications, viz., one to implead them as party to the Writ Petition and another to restore the Writ Petition, but, the said applications were disposed of by this Court on 07.12.2012 with an observation that the petitioners can approach this Court in the event of any future intervention by GHMC over the subject property. 6.4. It is further averred that subsequently, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.5757 of 2015 seeking to declare the proceedings of Chief Commissioner, whereby the entry in TSLR could not altered, as illegal and for consequential direction to District Collector to alter the existing entry in TSLR and the said Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 20.03.2015 and therefore, the present Writ Petition is filed. 7. A counter is filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 3, wherein it is inter alia stated that as per the records of the GHMC, the subject land forms part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village covered by approved layout of Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society, vide Permit No.51/1967, dated 19.09.1962, File No.86/OPEN/F/61 and the subject land has been gifted to GHMC along with another park and internal roads of Venkatramana Colony, vide document bearing No.P14/2595 of 1969, dated 27.12.1969; that the subject land falls in TS.No.45, which is part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and classified as ‘municipal park’ in TSLR; that the vendor of the petitioners submitted an application for building permission on 20.05.1989 claiming ownership over the park area of 600 square yards and the same was refused on 18.08.1989 on the ground that the site is a municipal park and the same is developed and fenced and that the vendor of the petitioners tried to encroach open the open space by constructing a pucca room with compound wall and the same was removed by the respondent-Corporation on 10.03.2008 by following the procedure contemplated under the GHMC Act. 7.1. 7.1. It is further stated that acting upon the letter of the Joint Collector, Hyderabad District, a hearing was conducted on 27.06.2013, wherein it was decided to conduct a detailed joint survey along with concerned revenue officials in presence of the petitioners to verify the total extent of area of Venkataramana Colony park which falls in TS.No.45, Block-Q, Ward No.11 in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and that accordingly, Tahsildar, Shaikpet Mandal, has conducted a joint survey on 31.08.2013 along with respondent Nos.1 and 3 and the GHMC officials, and that during the survey, it was observed that the approved layout of Venkataramana Colony was necessary to come to a conclusion, however, the same was not readily available as the records are more than 60 years old. 7.2. It is further averred that the District Collector has called for remarks from the Tahsildar, Khairatabad and also the RDO, Secunderabad Division and they have reported that Plot No.2 in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village was shown as ‘municipal park’ in Column No.20 of TSLR and hence, it is clearly established that the subject land is a municipal park. As per the provisions of the HMC Act, 1955, and also the Orders of this Court in Writ Petition No.7355 of 2001, open spaces in the layouts cannot be utilized for purposes other than for the intended use and therefore, the District Collector, Hyderabad, has not issued NOC to the petitioners. 8. A counter has been filed on behalf of respondent No.4 stating that as per Section 13 of the Survey and Boundaries Act, town survey was conducted during 1965-74 and as per Section 14 of the said Act, any person aggrieved by the entries prepared under Section 13 of the Act is entitled to institute a suit within a period of three years from the date of notification before a competent civil Court and the civil Court is competent to grant relief for correction of entries in TSLR and that the petitioners, instead of approaching the competent civil Court, have filed the present Writ Petition to decide the disputed questions of title and ownership and the issue relating to identification of Survey numbers and correction of Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village and as such, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed as the issues raised are purely civil in nature and requires elaborate evidence. 8.1. 8.1. It is further stated that neither the District Collector nor respondent No.4 is party to the aforesaid LGC, therefore, the findings recorded by the Special Court are binding only on the inter se parties and further, the same does not give any enforceable right for correction of records, that too, in a case filed by third parties and the petitioners are not entitled to the relief basing on the judgment rendered by the Special Court in LGC. 8.2. It is further stated that the Tahsildar, Khairatabad, addressed a letter dated 20.07.2015, to Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad District, informing that as per the report of the Deputy Inspector of Survey, the subject property falls in TS.No.45/p, Block-Q, Ward-11 of Shaikpet/Khairatabad Village, correlating to Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village and covered an extent of 470 square meters/562 square yards; that as per the TSLR, i.e., FCOLR, Survey No.94/p (Khairatabad) is correlated to TS.No.45 of Shaikpet Village and the area of TS.No.45, Block-Q, Ward-11, is 940 square meters and in Column No.20, the name of the present enjoyer is recorded as ‘M’, in column No.22, it is recorded as ‘park’ and in column No.23, it is recorded as ‘municipal park’ and that the TSLRs are prepared under the provisions of the A.P. Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 and have become final as no suit is filed for correction of entries and that the respondents have no power or authority under the said Act to correct the entries in the TSLR and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 9. Learned senior counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that the subject property forms part of Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village and does not form part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village, as contended by the GHMC as well as Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society. 9. Learned senior counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that the subject property forms part of Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village and does not form part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village, as contended by the GHMC as well as Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society. In support of his submission, he relied upon the observations of the Special Court in LGC.No.146 of 1989, wherein the Special Court appointed the Inspector of Survey as Commissioner to locate the subject property and to determine as to whether the subject property falls in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village or outside; and that the Commissioner conducted a survey in the presence of all the parties to the LGC, i.e., Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society, the vendors of the petitioners and MCH, and submitted a report and plans, which are marked as Exs.C-1 to C-10; that as per the said report, the subject land is surrounded by compound wall existing with one room and the subject property forms part of old Sy.No.94 of Khairatabad Village and does not fall in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village. Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society-petitioner in the said LGC, submitted objections to the said report of the Commissioner and considering the same, the Special Court directed the Commissioner to file a common comprehensive plan showing the boundaries of Sy.Nos.94 and 96 of Khairatabad Village and that of Sy.Nos.260 and 263 of Shaikpet Village with the help of Tippans of both the Villages and also to draw a separate plan with the help of RCNs of Town Survey and in pursuance of the said direction, the Commissioner furnished a common composite plan and on examination of the same, the Special Court observed that there is no overlapping of boundaries of Shaikpet and Khairatabad Villages along with Sy.Nos.94 and 260 or at any part and further observed that the earlier findings of the Commissioner that the subject land falls in Sy.No.94 and not in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village are confirmed and hence, the objections of Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society, the petitioner therein, are unfounded. 9.1. 9.1. Learned senior counsel further submitted that in the light of the findings recorded and the judgment passed by the Special Court in LGC.No.146 of 1989, which was confirmed by this Court in Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993 vide order dated 31.08.2004, the report and the common composite plans submitted by the Commissioner have become final and therefore, the GHMC cannot claim the subject land as part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and cannot treat the same as ‘municipal park’. 9.2. Learned senior counsel further submitted that despite the report and common composite plans submitted by the Commissioner, as per which, the subject land is forming part of Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village, and the categorical observations of the Special Court, which are confirmed by this Court in Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993, the District Collector issued proceedings, dated 18.09.2017, rejecting to issue NOC in favour of the petitioners, which is illegal and arbitrary, and finally, prayed to allow both the Writ Petitions. 9.3. Learned senior counsel further submitted that neither the District Collector nor the GHMC can claim the subject land as open space of layout of Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society meant for municipal park only basing on the entries in the TSLR, since the same are not conclusive proof of ownership and title. In support of his contention, he relied upon the judgment of this Court in Hyderabad Potteries Private Limited Vs. Collector , 2001(3) ALD 600 , wherein it is held that entries in TSLR does not confer any title over the property. By contending thus, he submitted that the District Collector ought to have issued NOC to the petitioners without waiting for any reply from the GHMC. 10. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for respondents- GHMC submitted that the subject land is meant for municipal park and forms part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and part of the layout obtained by Sri Venkataramana Co–Operative Housing Society. He further submitted that except relying upon the observations of the Special Court in LGC, the petitioners have not placed any material on record to show that the subject land forms part of Sy.No.94/p and does not form part of approved layout of Sri Venkataramana Co–Operative Housing Society. He further submitted that except relying upon the observations of the Special Court in LGC, the petitioners have not placed any material on record to show that the subject land forms part of Sy.No.94/p and does not form part of approved layout of Sri Venkataramana Co–Operative Housing Society. He further submitted that the vendors of the petitioners tried to encroach the open space by raising construction and it was removed by GHMC and therefore, the petitioners are not in possession of the same. He further submitted that the District Collector has rightly not issued NOC to the petitioners in view of clear entries in TSLR in Column No.20, wherein it is recorded as ‘park’. 10.1. He further submitted that the petitioners have not challenged the entries in TSLR and as per Section 14 of the Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923, the entries in TSLR have to be challenged within a period of three years from the date of notification and admittedly, as there is no challenge of the said entries in the TSLR, the same cannot be brushed aside and thus, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 11. In the light of the pleadings of both the parties and the submissions advanced by learned counsel appearing for the parties, the issues that fall for consideration of this Court are:- (i) Whether the entries in the TSLR at Column Nos.20, 22 and 23 therein in respect of the subject land are sustainable? (ii) Whether the District Collector is justified in not issuing NOC to the petitioners? (iii) To what relief? Issue No.1 :- 12. Admittedly, the subject land is recorded as ‘municipal park’ in Column No.20 of TSLR of Shaikpet Village, basing on which the GHMC is claiming the subject property and the District Collector has also not issued NOC to the petitioners to enable them to obtain permission for construction from GHMC in the subject land. 13. The petitioners herein are claiming the subject land to be part of Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village, having purchased the same under bona fide belief from their vendors. 14. 13. The petitioners herein are claiming the subject land to be part of Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village, having purchased the same under bona fide belief from their vendors. 14. Learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner has heavily relied upon the findings and observations of the Special Court in the LGC, wherein it is categorically held that the schedule land therein, in respect of which the vendors of the petitioners herein were sought to be declared as land grabbers, does not form part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and in fact, the schedule land therein falls in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village. 15. On contrary, the GHMC is claiming the subject property to be part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and part of layout of Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society, which was gifted by the said society in favour of GHMC. 16. It is relevant to note that in the LGC filed by Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society seeking to declare the vendors of the petitioners herein as ‘land grabbers’ in respect of land in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village, the Special Court in order to resolve the lis therein has appointed Inspector of Survey to conduct a comprehensive survey and submit a report. The Commissioner conducted a comprehensive survey in the presence of the petitioners, MCH and Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society and submitted a report that the subject property therein forms part of Sy.No.94/p and does not form part of Sy.No.260 of Shiakpet Village. Further, on objections raised by the petitioners therein, the Special Court directed the Commissioner to submit a composite combined plan by combining both Shaikpet as well as Khairatabad Villages and accordingly, composite comprehensive report was submitted by duly taking into consideration the Village Tippons and ultimately, concluded that there is no overlapping of boundaries of Shaikpet and Khairatabad Villages and Sy.Nos.94 and 260 and ultimately, the Special Court held that the schedule property in the LGC does not form part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and it forms part of Sy.No.94 to 96 of Khairatabad Village. 17. 17. The judgment passed by the Special Court in the LGC was challenged before this Court by way of filing Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993, wherein this Court vide order dated 31.08.2024 disposed of the said Writ Petition holding that there are no grounds to interfere with the findings of fact rendered by the Special Court that the schedule land does not form part of Sy.No.260 and further, granted liberty to the petitioner therein i.e., GHMC to take recourse to law with regard to land in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village. 18. The order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993 has become final since no material is placed on record to show that it was carried in appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that any order is passed therein with respect of the said land, which is subsisting. 19. Further, it is interesting to note that though this Court has granted liberty to the petitioner therein-GHMC to take recourse to law with regard to land in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village, it appears that no steps or action has been taken by the GHMC. 20. The report and the composite comprehensive report of an authority- Inspector of Survey is on record, which is to the effect that the schedule land in the LGC, which GHMC is claiming to be meant for ‘park’, does not fall in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village, as claimed by Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society and the findings of the Special Court taking into consideration the said report and plans of the Inspector of Survey, which are confirmed by this Court in Writ Petition No.14001 of 1993, are staring at the GHMC, the GHMC cannot retain or again take a similar stand as taken in the LGC before the Special Court that the land gifted to it by Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society, which is meant for park falls in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village. 21. Admittedly, Sri Venkataramana Co–Operative Housing Society purchased land admeasuring Acs.5.20 guntas in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and developed the same and obtained layout in respect of the said land and then, executed a gift deed in favour of GHMC in respect of park and internal roads. 21. Admittedly, Sri Venkataramana Co–Operative Housing Society purchased land admeasuring Acs.5.20 guntas in Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and developed the same and obtained layout in respect of the said land and then, executed a gift deed in favour of GHMC in respect of park and internal roads. Further, it is not the case of Sri Venkataramana Co–Operative Housing Society that land in Sy.No.94/petitioner forms part of layout obtained by them, therefore, the entry in Column No.20 of TSLR ought to have been only in respect of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and not Sy.No.94/petitioner of Khairatabad Village and hence, the entry at Column No.20 of TSLR appears to be erroneous. 22. Furthermore, the report of the Commissioner appointed by the Special Court in the LGC is to the effect that there is no overlapping of boundaries of Shaikpet and Khairatabad Villages. 23. In the light of the above, this Court holds this issue in favour of the petitioners, declaring the entry in Column No.20 of TSLR of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, showing the subject land as ‘municipal park’ as unsustainable. Issue Nos.2 & 3 :- 24. In view of the findings of this Court on issue No.1 that the subject land forms part of Sy.No.94/p and does not form part of Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village, in which Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society has obtained layout, this Court holds that the observation of the Commissioner, GHMC in impugned proceedings dated 18.09.2017, that as per the sketch plan of TS.No.45, Block-Q, Ward No.11 of Shaikpet Village furnished by Tahsildar, Shaikpet Mandal, along with TSLR records, the subject land comes under Sy.No.260 of Shaikpet Village and the same has been shown as park in the approved layout of Sri Venkataramana Co-Operative Housing Society, is contrary to the composite comprehensive report of Inspector of Survey and also the observations of the Special Court. 25. Accordingly, both the Writ Petitions are allowed and the impugned proceedings of respondent No.1 vide No.VRC/C- 10A/CZ/TPS/GHMC/ 2010-17/58, dated 18.09.2017, are hereby set aside and the authorities concerned are directed to delete the entry in Colum No.20 of TSLR of Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad, showing the land of 600 square meters in Sy.No.94/p of Khairatabad Village as meant for municipal park. There shall be no order as to costs. 26. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.