IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20655 of 2004 Between: Nimmagadda Vijaya Rani, W/o.Vimal Rao, R/o.52-1-1A, Harijanawada, Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, Vijayawada, rep.by its Commissioner. .....RESPONDENT 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 issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in interfering and threatening to demolish the structures of the house bearing No.52-1-1A admeasuring Ac.0.07 cents situated at Harijanawada, Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna District in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 20-10-2004 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and consequently direct the respondent corporation not to interfere with the structures of the petitioner house. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VENKAIAH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent: MR.T.S.VENKATARAMANA, Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporation, Vijayawada The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Municipal Corporation, Vijayawada. It is not in dispute that the petitioner constructed a RCC house after obtaining necessary permission from the respondent –Corporation and there is also a thatched house in front of the RCC house. According to the petitioner, the same was in existence from the last 20 years. The respondent issued an impugned notice dated 20-10-2004 to the petitioner under Section 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, (for short “the Act”) stating that he was constructing the house with hollow bricks in place of existing thatched house, which is being constructed without obtaining any permission from the respondent-Corporation, erecting partition walls, making into portions and erecting the doors to the out door walls without obtaining any permission from the respondent and accordingly, called for the explanation from him, failing to do so, necessary action will be taken under Section 636 of the Act, to which, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 28-10-2004 to the respondent and before passing any orders from the respondent, petitioner moved this Court by way of present writ petition. Since the petitioner himself admitted that the thatched house was in existence, the questions as to whether the said thatched house was constructed without obtaining any permission from the respondent-Corporation and whether the same was in existence from the last twenty years have to be decided by the authorities after due inspection and notice to the petitioner and if any pucca construction was made and partition was also erected, it is always open for the respondent-Corporation to point out such deviations and remove such unauthorized construction by granting time to the petitioner and if the petitioner fails to comply with the same, the Corporation can proceed further in accordance with law. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 11th NOVEMBER, 2004. Note: furnish c.c. in two days. B/o Kvni To 1. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, Vijayawada. 2. Two CD copies.