IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13866 of 2008 Between: M/s. Pulla Reddy Sweet Factory, rep. by its Proprietor B. Sreenivas Reddy, S/o. B. Prathap Reddy R/o.H.No.6-2-356/1, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad Road, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Municipality, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District rep. by its Commissioner. .....RESPONDENT 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to set aside the impugned Proceedings No.N.I.No./402/08 dated 25.06.2008 on the ﬁle of the respondent by declaring the same as illegal, void and without jurisdiction apart from violation of principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.VENKAT RAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: MR.RADHA KRISHNA POLISETTY (SC FOR MPL) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled by M/s.Pulla Reddy Sweet Factory rep. by its Proprietor B.Sreenivas Reddy with a prayer to issue a writ, order, or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceeding No.N.I.No./402/2008, dated 25.06.2008, passed by the respondent, as illegal and without jurisdiction. 2. The petitioner is doing business in preparing sweets. Neighbours complained to the respondent-Municipality that air emanated from the chimney and sound from the exhaust fan causing harm to them. The respondent-Municipality called for explanation from the petitioner on 13.05.2008. The petitioner submitted explanation stating that he has been carrying on the business for the last 10 years and there is no air or sound pollution due to preparation of sweets in his house. Ultimately, the respondent issued the proceeding No.N.I.No./402/2008, dated 25.06.2008, directing the petitioner to close down the sweets factory within three days. The said proceeding is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipality, received notice on behalf of the respondent. Interim suspension of the proceeding impugned in the writ petition came to be ordered on 03.07.2008. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent- Municipality. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that all the objections raised by the respondent-Municipality have been complied with and therefore, no ground exists to close down the sweet factory of the petitioner. 6. Such is the situation, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage directing the respondent-Municipality to cause the premises of the petitioner, wherein sweets are being prepared, inspected and if all the objections are complied with, the proceeding impugned in the writ petition shall stand set aside. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:04th August, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}