IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 6179 of 2009 Between: C. Leela Kumari W/o. Late C. Satyanarayana R/o. 16-1-570/1 to 3 , Saidabad, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Rep by its Commissioner, Tank Bund Hyderabad. 2 The Assistant Town Planning Officer Circle No.1, Sardar Mahal, Charminar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ order or order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the petitioner property bearing Municipal No. 16-1-570/1 to 3 admeasuring 61.56 sq. yards out of total extent of 323 sq. yards situated at Saidabad, Hyderabad without any notice and due process of law and in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1)(g) 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and principles of natural Justice and Consequently direct the respondents not to demolish petitioner property bearing Municipal No. 16-1-570/1 to 3 admeasuring 61.56 sq. yards out of total extent of 323 sq. yards situated at Saidabad, Hyderabad and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI.SUNIL GAWASANE Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent- Municipality, without issuing any notice and without initiating any proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act), is trying to acquire the land admeasuring 61.56 Sq. yards by demolishing her house bearing No.16-1-570/1 to 3, housed in that land situated at Saidabad, Hyderabad, for the purpose of widening the road. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation has submitted that the respondents have not issued any notice to the petitioner so far with regard to the proposal of demolition of certain portion of the petitioner’s property, and in case the respondents require any portion of the land or house of the petitioner for the purpose of widening the road, they shall certainly issue notice to the petitioner and initiate proceedings under the Act, and would pay suitable compensation, before taking action to demolish the house and acquiring the land, for widening the road. In view of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The respondents are directed to issue notice to the petitioner and follow due process under law before they take action to demolish her house and acquire the land for the purpose of widening the road”. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ 25th March, 2009 N.V.RAMANA, J bcj