The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.25600 of 2011 Date: 13.09.2011 Between: Smt.T.Venkat Kumari ..... Petitioner AND 1.The Deputy Commissioner of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Malkajgiri Circle, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad and another. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K.Mallikarjuna Rao Counsel for the Respondents: Sri R.Radhakrishna Reddy, SC for GHMC. The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside notice, dated 10-06-2010, issued by respondent No.1. The petitioner, on his own showing, constructed a building over Plot No.74, admeasuring 252.55 square yards, in Survey No.472, old Safilguda, Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District, without applying for and obtaining building permission. The respondents, on noticing that the petitioner was going ahead with the construction unauthorisedly, issued her a notice under Section 452 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), on 10-06-2010. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that, very recently, she has applied for regularisation under the Act and that the same is pending. Apprehending that the respondents may demolish the unauthorised construction pending her application for regularisation, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. Sri R.Radhakrishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, representing the respondents, submitted that, according to his instructions, no final notice under Section 636 of the Act has been issued so far. He further submitted that the petitioner has not submitted her explanation so far; that she may file her explanation to the impugned notice, issued under Section 452 of the Act, and; that after considering the explanation, if any, filed by her, the respondents will take further steps. In the light of the above facts, the Writ Petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to submit her explanation to notice, dated 10-06-2010, to respondent No.1, within two weeks from today. On receipt of such explanation, if any, respondent No.2 shall consider the same, take appropriate decision thereon and proceed in accordance with law. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.31552 of 2011, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 13th September, 2011 LUR