IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 5810 of 2008 Between: 1 pallemreddy Hariprasad Reddy, S/o.Venku Reddy,Hindu, R/o.Door No.27/2/1773. Lakshminagar, Balaji Nagar Extention, Nellore. 2 Mudi Venkata Sesha Reddy, S/o.Subba Reddy, R/o.Door No.27/2/1724, Lakshminagar, Balaji Nagar Extention, Nellore. 3 Gotta, Venkateshwaria, S/o.Ankaiah, R/o.Door No.27/2/1711/1, Lakshminagar, Balaji Nagar Extention, Nellore. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Nellore. 2 K.Venkata Subramanyam, S/o.Ramalinga Swamy, R/o.Door No.27/2/1727, Lakshminagar, Balaji Nagar extention, Nellore. 3 T.Madhusudhana, S/o.Not known, R/o.Door No.27/2/1727, Devi Residency,Lakshminagar, Balaji Nagar extention, Nellore. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus by directing the 1st respondent to cancel the building permission order given to second respondent for construction of apartment in the name and style of "Devi Residency" situated at Plot Nos.194 and 195 Sy.No.853, Ward No.27-2,Lakshminagar, Nellore vide Procs.No.2915/2007/6, dated 07-01-2008 for violating the conditions mentioned in the said proceedings and take steps for demolition of the said building and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.RAVI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent : MR.A.SREEDHAR FOR R16.04.08,VAK-1 MR.T.C.KRISHNAN FOR R04.07.08,VAK-2&3 The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 5810 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioners who are three in numbers with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus by directing the 1st respondent-Municipal Corporation, Nellore to cancel the building permission given to K.Venkata Subramanyam-2nd Respondent for construction of apartment in the name and style as ‘DEVI RESIDENCY’ situated at Plot Nos. 194 and 195, Lakshminagar, Nellore. 2. P.Hari Prasad Reddy has sworn to the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the petition. The writ affidavit in brief is:- The petitioners are resident of Geetanjali School Area of Nellore Municipal Corporation. T.Madhusudhana-3rd respondent started construction in Plot No. 194 and 195 owned by K.Venkata Subramanyam-2nd respondent under a development agreement. The apartment is being constructed without following the rules and regulations. Therefore the petitioners submitted representation to the Municipal Corporation, Nellore, to initiate necessary action against the respondents NO.2 and 3 for constructing the apartments in deviation of the sanctioned plan. There being no action on the representation, they approached this Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, this Court directed the 1st respondent Municipal Corporation to ﬁle the status report. Accordingly, status report has been ﬁled by the 1st respondent. As per the status report, the respondents 2 and 3 constructed residential apartment in deviation to the sanctioned plan. The relevant portion of the status report reads as hereunder. “The following are the deviations / Violations noticed by the concerned Subordinate Officers of this Respondent. Set Backs As per approved Construction as on ground Deviation/Violation Front 4.00 M 1.52 M 2.48 M Rear Open 4.00 M 2.35 M 1.65M Side 4.00 M 3.21 M * 1.50 M 0.79 & 2.50M Side 4.00 M 2-20 M 1.80 M Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 vide U.C.No. 18/07-B0-II requiring to show cause within 7 days and to remove the violated portions failing which this Respondent will remove/pull down such violated portion departmentally and to recover the amount incurred thereon as per the provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation act, 1956. It is to submit that the Second Respondent had completed the construction of ground ﬂoor and laid pillars for ﬁrst ﬂoor upto slab level. This is submitted for favour of kind information.” 4. Respondents 1 to 3 ﬁled counter. T.S.R.Anjaneyulu has sworn to the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of the 1st respondent. It is stated in the counter aﬃdavit that the 2nd respondent has carried on the construction in violation of the sanctioned plan and therefore a notice under Section 452(1) of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 came to be issued. 5. T. Madhusudan has sworn to the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of respondents NO.2 and 3. It is stated in the counter aﬃdavit that the 1st respondent oﬃcial inspected the apartments and found nominal deviations and issued notice under Section 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. In response to that notice, the respondents NO.2 and 3 submitted application dated 30-5-2008 by paying betterment charges and their application is pending consideration. According to the respondents 2 and 3 the deviations are minor, minimum and trivial which do not effect the public at large. 6. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 and learned counsel appearing for the Respondents NO.2 and 3. 7. That the factual aspect of the respondents making construction in deviation to the sanctioned plan is not in dispute. 1st Respondent initiated proceedings by issuing notice under Section 452(1) of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. 8. Respondents 2 and 3 ﬁled application seeking regularization of the deviations made by them in the construction. Their application is stated to be pending. 9. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st Respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners as soon as the application ﬁled by the respondents 2 and 3 seeking regularization of the construction made in deviation to the sanctioned plan is disposed. The respondent No.2 and 3 shall not make any further construction till the disposal of their application seeking regularization of the deviations made by them. No order as to costs. _____________________________ Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy 30th July, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 5810 OF 2008 30th July, 2008.