THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9588 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner owns a plot of land in Survey No.49/B of Matwada Revenue Village. With a view to construct a compound wall and watchman shed, initially, he approached the Municipal Corporation, Warangal. On being informed that the land is within the limits of Gram Panchayat, the petitioner approached the same. It is stated that permission was accorded for construction of a compound wall and watchman shed and the same has since been constructed. Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, Warangal, respondent No.1 herein issued a notice, dated 26.04.2006 under Section 42 of the Andhra Pradesh Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975. It was mentioned that the plot of the petitioner is going to be affected by a proposed National Highway. The petitioner was required to remove the construction existing on the land within five days and he was advised to obtain prior permission for change of land use and layout approval before any construction is made. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the notice. Respondent No.1 filed a counter-affidavit stating that the notice had to be issued since the construction made by the petitioner was found to be unauthorized. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1. The petitioner did not make any permanent construction. A compound wall and watchman shed were constructed with a view to avoid encroachments. The only basis on which the impugned notice was issued is that the land is going to be affected on account of expansion of the existing road to 200’. Even if that is true, respondent No.1 or any authority concerned have to acquire the affected portion in accordance with law. The averment of the petitioner that the compound wall and watchman shed were constructed on the basis of permission remains undisputed. The Urban Development Authority is not the agency to look after such construction. The necessity to obtain permission for change of land use or layout would arise, if only any permanent construction is going to be made. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice is set aside. It is, however, directed that the petitioner shall not make any permanent construction upon the land, without obtaining permission from the authorities concerned. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:02.06.2010 kdl