IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 4179 of 2004 Between: Sk. Najeemunneesa Begum, W/o. Mastan Saheb, Muslim, R/o. Garden Towers, 2nd Floor, Mangamur Road, Ongole, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Ongole Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3 Executive Engineer R & B, Head Office, Ongole, Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction declaring the action of Respondents in seeking to dispossess Petition from her building bearing D.No.1275/76 situated at Trunk Road, Ongole, Prakasam District or demolish the same or any portion thereof with out following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary etc., Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.V.L.MURHTY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4179 of 2004 ORDER: This writ petition is filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in seeking to dispossess the petitioner from his building bearing D.No.1275/76, situated at Trunk Road, Ongole, Prakasam District and demolish the same, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner states that he purchased the house bearing D.No.1275/76, situated at Trunk Road, Prakasam District, and the said property is assessed to property tax with Assessment No.17943, dated 20.12.2003. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents, without taking any steps for acquisition of his property, are taking steps to demolish the same, by marking a portion of the building. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent. In the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent- Executive Engineer, R&B, Ongole, it is stated that the Roads and Buildings Department is in no way concerned with demolition of any building or eviction of encroachments, and that the Municipal Authorities, Ongole, marked the boundaries for laying Cement Concrete Pavement after handing over clear site in Ongole Town limits. In the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent- Commissioner, it is stated that they have not taken any steps either to demolish the property of the petitioner or to dispossess him from his property, and as he is not deprived of his property, there is no need for payment of any compensation to him. In view of the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, it appears that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition on mere apprehension. Recording the statement made by the second respondent in his counter that the respondents are neither taking steps to demolish the house property of the petitioner nor to dispossess him, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. R.SUBHASH REDDY,J Date:22.07.2009 usd