IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 15872 of 2001 Between: Sidhartha Academy of General & Technical Education Rep BY Its Secretary M.Subbarao Sidhartha Nagar, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONER AND The Commissioner The Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issuea WRIT, Direction or order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in directing the petitioner to pay Rs.2, 16, 420/- pursuant to petitioners BRS application to pay No.3393/98 vide demand notice dt.18/7/2001 as arbitrary illegal, ultravires the powers the respondents and consquently direct the respondents not to demolish the 3rd floor Building of P.B. Siddhartha Arts & Science College, Siddhartha Nagar, Vijayawada and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:M/SC.KODANDA RAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.G.JHANSI The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 15872 of 2001 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner – institution has filed the present writ petition questioning the validity of the demand notice in Rc.G1.B.R.S.No.3393/98 dated 18.7.2001 issued by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada. The building of the petitioner’s institution was constructed for institutional purpose and it has constructed third floor. It is the case of the petitioner that an application was submitted seeking grant of permission and as there was no response from the respondents within the statutory period, in view of the deemed provision, it has proceeded with the construction. On the other hand, it is the case of the respondents that the application of the petitioner was rejected as some necessary documents were not enclosed along with the application. The government has earlier notified building regularization scheme under G.O.Ms.No.419 M.A. dated 30.7.1998 and the petitioner has applied for regularization of its building. Thereafter, the respondents have issued impugned letter of demand informing the petitioner to pay an amount of RS.2,16,420/- after deducting the amount of Rs.22,425/- already paid, as regularization fee to consider its application for regularization. However, in the mean time, the very validity of the building regularization scheme notified under G.O.Ms.No.419 dated 30.7.1998 came to be questioned before this court and a Division Bench of this Court has quashed the scheme itself. In that view of the matter, it is not necessary to decide the validity of the impugned demand notice. Further it is brought to my notice that subsequently Act No,6 of 2003 is enacted for regularization of unauthorized constructions in municipal corporations, municipalities and urban areas and rules were framed under the said Act to consider the applications for regularization. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the interim order of this Court dated 2.8.2001, the petitioner has a deposited a further amount of Rs.1,00,000/- before the respondent – corporation. In view of the developments referred to above, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to make a fresh application for regularization by paying necessary fee within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If such an application is filed, the respondent shall consider the same by taking into account the amount of Rs.22,425/- which was already paid as per the scheme which was in force under G.O.Ms.No.419 dated 30.7.1998 and Rs.1,00,000/- deposited pursuant to the orders of this Court. It is made clear that the regularization shall be subject to the petitioner complying with all the necessary requirements in accordance with the building regularization scheme in force. The respondents shall not take any steps till final orders are passed on the application to be filed by the petitioner. It is also made clear that the if no application is filed as referred to above, it is open to the respondents to take all necessary steps in accordance with law by issuing necessary notice. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________ 24-6-2009 asp