IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 775 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 24/12/2008 in WP NO : 27987 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Deeksha Educational Society, Rep. by its Secretary P. Padma Sheela Chandra Mohan, Age 48 Years, R/o. H.No. 6-2-13, Shivarampally, N.P.A. (Post), Ranga Reddy District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. Hyderabad, Rajendranagar Circle. 3 Gulam Subhani, S/o. Late Gulam Samdani, R/o. D.No. 20-4-55, New Bus Stand, Charminar, Hyderabad. 4 Farooq Bin Ahmed, S/o. Ahmed Bin, Omer, R/o. H.No. 18-7-198/A/38, New Moghalpura, Hyderabad. 5 Habeeb Ali Buftaim, S/o. Habeeb Saleh, Burtaim, R/o. H.No. 8-33/1, Shaheen Nagar, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant: SRI A.SUDERSHAN REDDY Counsel for the RespondentS No.: SRI R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 775 of 2009 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ appeal is preferred by the appellant-3rd respondent aggrieved by the order, dated 24.12.2008 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.27987 of 2008. The appellant herein is the 3rd respondent and respondents 3 to 5 are the petitioners in the writ petition. Respondents 3 to 5 herein filed the above writ petition seeking to declare the inaction of respondents 1 and 2 in demolishing the unauthorized construction of compound wall by respondent No.3 therein, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct respondents 1 and 2 to take necessary steps for demolition of the unauthorized compound wall of respondent No.3. The learned single Judge having observed that as the writ petitioners have made a complaint stating that they are the GPA Holders and some third parties, particularly, the 3rd respondent is making constructions without any right whatsoever, a duty is cast upon the authorities to cause a detailed enquiry into the said allegations made in the complaint dated 12.2.2007, disposed of the writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to cause a detailed enquiry into the allegations made in the complaint. It was also observed that since the usual notice to respondent No.3 is dispensed with, the official respondents are directed to put the 3rd respondent on notice before holding any enquiry. It was made clear that such exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and till such exercise is completed, the 3rd respondent shall not proceed with any further construction. Having aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed by the 3rd respondent in the writ petition. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the writ petition was disposed of at the admission stage, without issuing any notice to the appellant and directing the official respondents to issue notice and that the writ petitioners have suppressed the material facts that their predecessors-in-title have filed L.G.C No.734 of 2004 and the same is pending and that their predecessors-in-title have mortgaged their alleged properties with the Punjab National Bank and that the surveyor submitted a report to the effect that the properties mortgaged by the predecessors-in-title of the writ petitioners were not within the compound wall of the appellant and that the compound wall and watchman room were constructed by the appellant more than 10 years back and the same are assessed to municipal tax. The above aspects are disputed question of facts and they can only be adjudicated before the appropriate forum after production of the evidence. In these circumstances and in view of the fact that the appellant was not put on notice, and no opportunity was given to him to represent the case before the learned single Judge, and in view of the averments in the writ appeal that LGC is pending, We feel that the order of the learned single Judge is not justified and hence, the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed setting aside the order of the learned single Judge. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. It is made clear that both the parties are at liberty to resolve their dispute before the appropriate forum. _________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ____________________________ Justice VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Date:24th April, 2009 Nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO :775 of 2009 (Judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 24th April, 2009