THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 29106 OF 2011 ORDER : 1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus setting aside the notice dated 13.10.2011 issued by the second respondent under Sections 452, 461 and 463 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act, 1955’) as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he is tenant of premises bearing door No.10-1-43, admeasuring 45 square yards in stilt floor of the complex namely ‘Siripuram Fort’ situated in L.P. No.200/59, Plot No.45A, T.B. Road Area covered by Block No.8, T.S. No.71, Waltair Ward, Visakhapatnam, having obtained lease from one Mr.Satinder Singh Sethi, who is its owner, and has been running a Computer Training Centre investing huge amounts. The respondent corporation, after examining in detail and considering zonal regulations, approved the construction permission vide proceedings No. B.A., No.359/97/ACP-II, dated 25.03.1999. On 27.10.2011, the petitioner received the impugned notice dated 13.10.2011 issued by the second respondent under Sections 452 and 461 of the Act, 1955 stating that part of parking area of stilt floor of the building was converted into commercial purpose contrary to the rules and regulations, and calling for explanation within 3 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. Owner of the building has already filed application under Building Penalization and Regularization scheme for regularization of minor deviations made and the same is pending. Without considering pendency of the application, the impugned notice has been issued. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that two weeks’ time may be granted for giving explanation to the impugned notice. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents contends that 3 days’ time is more than sufficient for giving the explanation since the petitioner is only a tenant, who is not having any documents. 5. The petitioner is tenant of the premises in question. On 27.10.2011, he received the impugned notice stating that part of the parking area of stilt floor was converted into commercial purpose contrary to the rules and regulations and to submit explanation within three days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The notice has been issued both to the owner as well as the petitioner-tenant for submitting explanation. According to the respondent- corporation, unauthorized construction has been made on the portion earmarked for parking of vehicles. The petitioner has to submit necessary explanation to the impugned notice dated 13.10.2011, which has been admittedly received by him on 27.10.2011. Therefore, two weeks’ time can be given to the petitioner to submit the explanation. 6. Therefore, the petitioner is granted time till 12.11.2011 to give his explanation to the impugned notice. Thereafter, the respondents shall take appropriate decision thereon in accordance with the rules and regulations. Till such time, unauthorized construction, if any, shall not be demolished without due process of law. 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 29.10.2011 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 29106 OF 2011 29.10.2011 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 29106 OF 2011 DATED 29.10.2011 Between: Mr. Sandeep Chowdary …Petitioner And The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner & another …Respondents