THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.28156 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in high handedly attempting to dispossess and demolish the structures admeasuring 807 sq.feet in the basement floor of the building known as Leelaplaza situated in plot No.114, Sector-12, M.V.P.Colony, Visakhapatnam inspite of judgment and decree passed by the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, dated 21.04.2005, in O.S.No.2593 of 2002 granting permanent injunction in favour of the petitioner and the pendency of the Building Regularization Scheme (B.R.S.) application No.3875/98/ACP-I without issuing any notice and without conducting any enquiry as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the said property. 2. The petitioner is a tenant in respect of shop room Nos.4 and 8 admeasuring 807 sq.ft in the basement floor of the aforesaid building. He took the premises on lease on 15.10.2002 and the same is being used as a godown for his furniture shop. He obtained permission from the Commercial Tax Department. The said premises is not part of the parking area allotted to the other shop owners. This particular part of the basement is meant for using it as a godown in such a big commercial area. When respondent No.2 Corporation attempted to remove the constructions, the landlord of the petitioner made an application seeking to regularize the deviation under the Building Regularization Scheme and paid an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- and the said deviation in the cellar portion is not objectionable to anybody. But the officials of respondent No.2 came to the premises on 12.09.2011 and stated that the premises in question would be demolished. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that without there being any notice, the officials of respondent No.2 are trying to demolish the cellar shop No.1 and therefore, he prays to issue a direction to the respondents. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 contended that as the cellar was not constructed in terms of the rules, respondent No.2 would take action in accordance with law after giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. 5. No person shall be permitted to make any construction in the cellar or parking area when they are earmarked for the said purpose. For removal of those illegal or unauthorized constructions, if any made on the cellar or parking area, the Municipality can take action in accordance with law. Therefore, the Municipality is directed to issue a notice to the owner of the premises before taking any action calling for his explanation and after receipt of explanation, if any, take appropriate action in accordance with law. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 01st November, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.28156 OF 2011 Date:01.11.2011 AMD