Supreme Court refuses to stay HC’s order on R5 Zone of Amaravati
NEW DELHI: While paving the way for the Andhra Pradesh government to allot house sites to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in R5 Zone of the Amaravati capital region, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said land pattas would be subject to the outcome of writs pending in the High Court. A bench headed by Justice KM Joseph said persons to whom patta would be granted under the EWS scheme, which is subject matter to the writ, would not be entitled to plead any special equity in case the verdict goes against them.
“After hearing the parties, we are of the view that we have to modify the impugned order and direct that pattas issued to the EWS housing sector will be subject to the orders and decisions to be rendered in the writ petitions which have been filed. Accordingly, we direct the Capital Region Development Authority (CRDA), while issuing pattas, shall make it clear that it would be subject to the pleas pending in the HC. We also make it clear that persons to whom patta is granted under EWS scheme and which is the subject matter of writ will not be entitled to plead any special equities in case the verdict goes against them,” the bench said.
The plea was filed against the high court’s May 5 order in which it had declined to pass interim orders for staying the March 21 notification and GO dated March 31, 2023. The AP government by way of the March 21 notification had modified the masterplan for the Amaravati capital city, according to which certain land was allocated towards providing housing to the poor. Consequently, vide the impugned GO, certain lands which form a part of the land pooled from various farmers for the development of the Amaravati Capital City in 2015, have been allotted for the development of EWS house sites.
The plea had alleged that the impugned GO, which allowed for amendment of the original masterplan, was in violation of the judgment of the full bench of the High Court in the Amaravati capital matter dated March 3, 2022.
It was also contended in the plea that the impugned GO gave away a piece of land in the capital territory for EWS housing, while it was meant for the creation of an Electronic City as per the Notified Master Plan issued in 2016 and as contemplated under the Development Agreement/LPS (land pooling scheme) between the Amaravati farmers and the State.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate AM Singhvi for the State contended that the matter did not violate the capital judgment. He also argued that the land was sought to be allocated to EWS in accordance with Section 53(1)(d) of the APCRDA Act.
