IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16771 of 2007 Between: S.V.S.Enclave Flat Owners Association, Shiva Jyothi Nagar, Tirupati, rep.by its Secretary K.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary- Municipal Administration & Urban Development Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 Tirupati Municipal Corporation, Rep.by its Commissioner Tirupati, Chittoor District 3 Tirupati Urban Development Authority, Tirupati rep.by its Vice Chairman 4 Smt.D.Nirmala W/o.D.Subrahmanyam Raju R/o.Flat No.101, S.V.S.Enclave, shiva Jyothi nagar Tirupati 5 S.V.S.Constructions, rep.by its Managing partner Rep.by its Managing PArtner, Sri G.Naga Durga Ramesh R/o.D.No.60-17-1/1, Siddardh Nagar, Vijayawada .....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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to implement the confirmation order vide UC.No.2/2007/B.O.No.III dated 9.1.2007 by demolishing the illegal, construction made by the 4th respondent in the complex S.V.S.complex, Shiva Jyothi Nagar Tirupati, Chittoor District Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.RAGHU Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. Counsel for Respondent No.2: Sri S.I. Newton Counsel for Respondent No.3: Sri R. Ganga Rami Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.4: Sri P.S. Sastry The Court made the following : ORDER: In this petition, the petitioner – flat owners association seeks directions by way of mandamus for confirmation of orders pursuant to notice dated 09-01-2007 issued under Section 228 (1) and (2) of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965. The 4th respondent is the owner of the site in question who was granted permission in proceedings No. B.A No. 234/G2/2004, dated 03-06-2004 for construction of stilt plus five floors and that pursuant to the said permission, 50 flats were constructed and the members of the petitioner – association have purchased the same. It is the grievance of the members of the petitioner – association that some further constructions are being made in the open site admeasuring 194.59 square meters which was left open as per the sanctioned plan. It is also their grievance that though the respondent – Municipality has issued notice for removal of such unauthorized constructions, no steps are being taken by issuing order confirming the said notice. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, it is stated that after issuance of notice dated 09-01-2007, Tirupati Municipality was converted as a Corporation and it is presently covered by the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) as adopted to it. It is also stated that after conversion of the municipality into municipal corporation, notices as contemplated under Sections 454, 461 and 636 of the Act were issued with regard to the unauthorized constructions and that further steps are not being taken in view of the orders of status quo passed by the civil Court. Even in the affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner also it is stated that the association has filed suit O.S No. 1727 of 2006 before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi against respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and interim orders of status quo were passed by the Court on 05-01-2007 and the said orders are in force. Counter affidavit is also filed by respondent Nos. 4 and 5. In view of the fact that the 2nd respondent – Corporation has already issued notices under Section 452, 461 and 636 of the Act, it cannot be said that the official respondents have not taken any further steps. Though the petitioner seeks a direction for issuing confirmation order pursuant to notice dated 09-01-2007, in view of conversion of the respondent municipality into municipal corporation, the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 cannot be made applicable to it and it is governed by the statutory provisions of the Act as adopted to it. As it is stated that the official respondents have already taken further steps by issuing notices as stated above, no direction can be given, as prayed for by the petitioner in this writ petition. Leaving it open to the respondent – Corporation to take steps pursuant to notice under Section 636 of the Act and also take action as per the orders of the civil Court, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 29-04-2009 ks