THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 30854 OF 2011 ORDER : 1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in issuing notice vide RoC No.5986/2008/G1, dated 15.11.2011 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same. 2. Case of the petitioner may be stated as follows: In the year 1996, the then Tirupathi Municipality allotted house sites in survey no.416/2 in an extent of Ac.0.80 cents at Fish Market, Devendra Theatre Road, Tirupathi to its 108 employees i.e. each employee was allotted 30.33 square yards. One Mr. K.Dhamodar @ Damu was allotted 30.33 square yards of land in plot no.90/1 at Sl.No.100 in the allotted list and was living by constructing asbestos shed house. Due to financial constraints, the original allottee sold the said house to petitioner vide sale agreement dated 17.8.2011 for consideration. Thereafter, the petitioner is in peaceful possession of the said house and paying property tax. While so, the respondent issued the impugned notice to remove unauthorized asbestos shed within 7 days. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that without issuance of show-cause notice as required under Section 461 of the HMC Act, final notice is issued, which does not indicate any particulars with regard to contravention of any provision or bye-laws or statute. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent corporation, on instructions, submitted that after issuance of show- cause notice with regard to deviations, if any, necessary action would be initiated by the respondent corporation. 5. Notice dated 15.11.2011 was issued to the petitioner stating that she unauthorizedly made construction with cement roof shed contrary to the building bye-laws and regulations. Therefore, the petitioner was directed to remove the same within 7 days. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a decision in S.Rama Gopal and others v. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad & another, and contended that the procedure laid down in the said decision has not been followed. It is held in the said decision thus: “… The show cause notice under the relevant provision specifying the nature and details of violation and the action proposed to be taken shall precede the final order that may be passed under the relevant provisions of law. These are the essential requirements of the principles of natural justice…” The procedure as stated in the above decision has not been followed. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the respondent corporation is directed to issue show-cause notice duly indicating violations, if any, made by the petitioner, and after receipt of explanation, appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondent in accordance with law. 6. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed. No costs. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 22.11.2011 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 30854 OF 2011 22.11.2011 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 30854 OF 2011 DATED 22.11.2011 Between: G.Suneetha …Petitioner And The Municipal Corporation of Tirupathi, rep. by its Commissioner, Chittoor District …Respondent