THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition Nos.14406 and 23259 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: Since both the matters are inter-connected, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record. W.P.No.14406 of 2009 is filed aggrieved by the action of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation in not taking any action against respondent Nos.2 and 3, who are the petitioners in W.P.No.23259 of 2009, for making illegal and unauthorized constructions in the subject premises, while W.P.No.23259 of 2009 is filed aggrieved by the action of the GHMC in issuing notice, dated 20.10.2009, directing the petitioners to remove/demolish the unauthorized constructions mentioned in the said notice, within 24 hours. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in W.P.No.14406 of 2009. In W.P.No.14406 of 2009, on 28.07.2009, as it was stated that the enquiry is still under progress, this Court directed respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to proceed with any further constructions. Likewise, while granting time to the learned Standing Counsel for the GHMC, on 29.10.2009 in W.P.No.23259 of 2009, this Court directed the GHMC not to take further steps in pursuance of the impugned notice. The petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3 are neighbourers. They state that are the absolute owners and possessors of their respective premises. Disputes have arisen between them with regard to set backs to be maintained, resulting in filing civil suits and the present writ petitions against each other. On 03.11.2009, this Court directed the Assistant City Planner, Malkajgiri Circle of GHMC, to make a visit to the site in question and mark the offending portions, and in particular the ramp constructed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 as well as in the premises of the petitioner duly taking into account the sanctioned plan, within a period of one week, and also made an observation that the respective parties shall be under obligation to remove the offending portions within one week thereafter. Accordingly, the Assistant City Planner, Circle No.16, Alwal, GHMC submitted a report indicating the set backs permitted, maintained and the deviations in respect of the subject premises. From a perusal of the report submitted, it is clear that there are certain deviations in the constructions made by respondent Nos.2 and 3 as well as by the petitioner from the sanctioned plan in respect of the subject premises. It is also stated in the report that respondent Nos.2 and 3 filed an application along with building plans under Building Penalisation Scheme (BPS) for regularization of the deviations pointed out by the GHMC, but no such application is filed by the petitioner. However, at the hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner (in W.P.No.14406 of 2009) that the deviations pointed out by the GHMC in respect of the petitioner’s premises are minor in nature and the petitioner is willing to remove the deviations voluntarily and requested to take necessary action against the illegal constructions made by respondent Nos.2 and 3. At this stage, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that though respondent Nos.2 and 3 filed application under BPS, in view of pendency of the writ petition, the GHMC is not able to take any action in the matter. Having heard the learned counsel and having perused the material on record, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitions with the following directions: (1) the GHMC is directed to issue notice to both the parties indicating the deviations, if any, in respect of the subject premises; (2) insofar as the application filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 under BPS is concerned, the GHMC is directed to regularize those deviations which can be regularized and communicate the deviations which cannot be regularized and see that those deviations are removed within a specified time and (3) insofar as the deviations in respect of the petitioner’s premises are concerned, as he himself voluntarily intended to remove the same, the GHMC is directed to supervise the same. With the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:19.07.2010 VGB