Sujathanagar

1. Introduction: The Issue at Hand

Overview of the Issue:

I am an NRI from USA and originally from Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India, has been facing a significant legal issue concerning my real estate investment in Visakhapatnam. In 2004, I purchased six plots of land in Nagamalli Nagar Layout, Visakhapatnam, as part of a larger layout approved by the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA). The land, which spans 1141.63 square yards (or 954.55 square meters), was initially bought with the intention of securing my financial future, especially for my children’s education. Over the years, I took measures to protect the land, including erecting a boundary wall and installing utilities.

In 2016, I partnered with a real estate developer to build a multi-story residential building on the land after obtaining all the necessary approvals from VUDA. However, construction came to a halt when it was discovered that an adjacent 100+ acre plot, owned by a government defense agency (NAVY), was developing. The defense agency erected a boundary wall that extended near my property, and a legal notice was issued instructing me to stop construction. The issue stems from government regulations that prohibit construction within 500 meters of a defense site. This unexpected obstacle threatens to nullify years of hard work, investment, and planning, leaving me and other landowners in a difficult situation. I seek guidance on how to resolve the legal challenge and protect my investment being an NRI.

Personal Background:

My name is Ganesh M, and I have been residing near Washington, DC, since 1997 after relocating to the USA. Originally from Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, I own an apartment in my hometown where my elderly parents currently live, supported by my sister’s family. I moved to the USA for better opportunities, and I have worked diligently to ensure the well-being of my family back in India. My journey has involved making strategic investments to secure my financial future, and one such investment was in land, which I had hoped would provide long-term benefits, particularly in securing funds for my children’s education.

2. Property Details

Plot Information:

Plot Size and Location

• • • Plot Size: The plot in question measures 1141.63 square yards (or 954.55 square meters).
    • Location: It is located in Nagamalli Nagar Layout, near Sujatha Nagar, which is part of the Chinamushidivada village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam district, Andhra Pradesh.
    • Layout Approval: The layout is approved by the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA) under L.P. No. 30/2004, covering R.S. No. 179/2.

Registration and Ownership Details

• • • Owner: The plot was purchased by me in 2004 as part of a larger property development. I acquired six plots in total.
    • Registration: The purchase and transfer of ownership were conducted legally through the proper channels in India. The land is registered under the specified details of L.P. No. 30/2004, which was approved by VUDA.

Layout Approval by VUDA

• • • Layout Approval: The Nagamalli Nagar Layout, which consists of more than 200+ plots, was approved by the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA) under L.P. No. 30/2004.
    • Other Details: The land was initially developed for residential purposes and has all necessary permissions for construction, including approval from VUDA and the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC).

Original Investment Details

• • • Total Investment: I invested US $75.000 (Rs. 30,00,000 when US Dollar was Rs 40 against Indian ruppees) (Rupees 30 Lakhs) in 2004 for the purchase of six plots. Now this is equal to Rs 68 Lakhs with increased doallar value.
    • Investment Source: The funds for this investment were transferred from my savings and home equity in the USA through ICICI Bank.
    • Purpose: The investment was intended to secure my family’s financial future, particularly to support my children’s education, given the high costs associated with higher studies in the USA.

3. Timeline of Events

1. 2004: Purchased property in Visakhapatnam for 30 Lakhs INR after transferring US $75,000 (at a rate of 40 INR per USD).
2. 2008: Constructed a boundary wall to secure the site.
3. 2010: Paid vacant land tax as per local requirements.
4. 2012: Built another perimeter fence and a shed for a watchman to secure the site.
5. 2016: Applied for construction approval to VUDA for residential apartments and received full approval.
6. 2017:
   1. Start of Construction: Ground preparation began for the first set of pillars after obtaining electricity connections and drilling a bore well.
   2. Legal Interruption: Received a legal letter from the Project Director at Ship Building Center, Naval Dockyard, ordering to stop construction due to a prohibition on building within 500 meters of their boundary wall.
   3. Grievance Filing: A grievance was registered with CPGRAMS, PMO Office, New Delhi (Grievance No: PMOPG/E/2017/0645741).
7. 2018: Follow-up requests sent to Visakhapatnam Collector and Commissioner, but no responses despite repeated requests for updates.
8. 2019:
9. Registered a grievance with APNRTS and was advised to file with AP Police NRI Cell. A complaint (No: 70811862) was registered, and the response forwarded the issue to the District Collector, Visakhapatnam.
10. 2022: Personally met the Collector, submitted documents, and highlighted the challenges faced as an NRI, as over 200+ plots had been purchased by other citizens facing similar issues.
11. 2024: Your lawyer in Visakhapatnam represented the case multiple times in court (Case No: OS/0000570/2017, VI Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, CNR Number: APVS010006332017).
12. 2025:
    1. April (Visit): Submitted additional documentation during Spandana Monday grievance; received promises of a resolution. Follow-up from the Joint Collector assistant requesting more information, which was provided on time.
    2. October (Visit): Filed another grievance (Grievance No: VSP202509293318) at the PGRS Collectorate, Visakhapatnam, but after initial acknowledgment from MRO, there were no updates despite multiple follow-up requests.
    3. December: Final court judgment ruled to stop construction within 500 meters of the naval boundary wall. Unclear why nearby land acquisition wasn’t possible under these restrictions, especially as VUDA approved construction in a nearby layout (within 150 meters).
13. 2026 (Planned): Planning another visit to the Collector office in March to further address the unresolved issue as an NRI, still struggling after 20+ years of delays.

4. Legal Challenges

5. Affected Stakeholders

6. Government Policies and Regulations

7. Steps Taken So Far

8. Request for Assistance

9. Attachments and Supporting Documents

10. Conclusion