IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 12608 of 2008 Between: P.Kishore S/o.P.Mohanlal R/o.H.No.4-7-1006, Easamia Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad 2 The Deputy Commissioner, Circle -VIII The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Abids, Hyderabad 3 The Assistant City Planner, Circle -VIII, The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Abids, Hyderabad 4 Sri Raj Gopal Sharma, S/o.Damodar Sharma H.No.4-7-824, Easamia Bazar, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the oﬃcial respondents is not taking any action against the 4th respondents in making illegal, construction without sanctioned permission and contrary to the building permission and layout rules and without leaving set backs causing substantial damage to the property which is opposite to the 4th respondent property pursuant to the representation made by the petitioner dated 7.5.2008,14.5.2008 10.6.2008 consequently direct the oﬃcial respondents to take action against the 4th respondent for making illegal, construction without sanctioned permission contrary to the building construction rules and layout rules in premises No.4-7- 824 Esamiya Bazar, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BANGINATI NARENDER Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3:MR. R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY, LEARNED STANDING COUNSEL OF GHMC. Counsel for the Respondent No.4: M/s.DAMODAR MUNDRA & DINESH K.GILDA The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled by P.Kishore assailing the inaction of the respondents 1 to 3 on his representations, dated 07.05.2008, 14.05.2008 and 10.06.2008 complaining the illegal constructions being made by Raj Gopal Sharma-4th respondent encroaching the road portion. 2. The houses of the petitioner and the 4th respondent are opposite to each other intervened by a road. According to the petitioner, the width of the road ranges from 8 feet to 13.6 feet. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the 4th respondent is proceeding with the construction without obtaining any permission from the respondents 1 to 3 encroaching the road portion. The petitioner submitted representations to the respondents 1 to 3 on 07.05.2008, 14.05.2008 and 10.06.2008. There being no action on the representations submitted by him to the respondents 1 to 3, he approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Respondents 1 to 3 ﬁled counter-aﬃdavit. V.S.Sharma, Assistant City Planner of Circle-8 of Central Zone of GHMC, Hyderabad, has sworn to the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of the 3rd respondent. It is stated in the counter-aﬃdavit that proceedings have been initiated by issuing a notice under Section 461 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, against the 4th respondent with regard to the illegal constructions being made by him. Para.2 of the counter- affidavit reads as hereunder: “2. In reply to paragraph 2 of the Aﬃdavit, it is submitted that when the Respondent No.4 has commenced the construction of Ground Floor with RCC Columns at premises No.4-7-824, situated at Esamiya Bazaar, Hyderabad, without permission as required under Sections 428 to 433 of HMC Act, 1955, the Respondent Corporation has stopped the construction work by issuing notice under Section 461 of HMC Act, 1955. After receiving the said notice, the Respondent No.4 has stopped the work completely. However, after 2 days the 4th respondent has commenced the construction work and the Respondent Corporation issued Show Cause Notice under Section 452 of HMC Act, 1955.” 4. 4th respondent ﬁled a separate counter-aﬃdavit. It is stated in the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of the 4 th respondent that he has not encroached any portion of the road and he undertook the construction as per Permit No.237/23602, dated 16.04.1999. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel of GHMC appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the 4th respondent completed the constructions pending the writ petition without there being any permission from the respondents 1 to 3 and therefore, necessary directions are required to be given to the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the illegal constructions made by the 4th respondent. 7. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submits that necessary action has already been initiated against the 4th respondent by issuing notice under Sections 461 and 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submits that it is the petitioner, who encroached on the road portion and not the 4th respondent. 9. A fact remains that the respondents 1 to 3 have already initiated proceedings against the 4th respondent by issuing notices under Sections 461 and 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. The only direction that can be given to the respondents 1 to 3 is to pass ﬁnal orders pursuant to the show- cause notice issued under Sections 461 and 452 of the Act after receiving the explanation from the 4th respondent. This exercise shall be completed within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:09th September, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RS}