HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 18103 of 2009 DATED: 11.09.2009 Between: G. Swarajya Lakshmi .. Petitioner And 1. The Commissioner, GHMC 2. The Asst. City Planner 3. The Special Deputy Collector and Land Acquisition Officer, GHMC .. Respondents O R D E R: The petitioner asserts that she is the absolute owner and possessor of the premises bearing No.6-3-788/20 admeasuring 233 Sq. yards situated at Panjagutta, Ameerpet Road, Hyderabad, having acquired the same under a registered sale deed dated 19.02.1986. While so, the petitioner states that the respondents-authorities acquired 62.18 Sq. yards for the purpose of widening the road and paid compensation to her. After acquisition of 62.18 Sq. yards, the petitioner is left with 170.82 Sq. yards. Now, it is her grievance that the 2nd respondent, at the instigation of the neighbouring owners, is threatening to demolish her building high-handedly for acquiring further extent of 24.17 Sq. yards out of the left over extent of 170.82 Sq. yards. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. This Court, on 27.08.2009, while admitting the writ petition, granted interim direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s property and structures in an extent of 24.17 Sq. yards. Today, when the matter was called, the learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation appearing for the respondents submitted that they are not interfering with the possession of the petitioner over her property and it is the petitioner, who encroached the acquired land, and further, if the petitioner’s land of an extent of 24.17 Sq. yards is required by the respondents-Corporation, they will follow the due process of law before taking possession of the same. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and having regard to the stand taken by the learned Standing Counsel that they will follow the due process of law if they require the petitioner’s property for widening the road, and having regard to the submission made by him that the petitioner has encroached the acquired land, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “If the petitioner has encroached the land belonging to the respondent-Corporation, the Corporation is at liberty to get the encroachments or any structures made by her therein demolished. If the respondent-Corporation further wants to acquire the petitioner’s property, for the purpose of widening the road, they shall follow the due procedure under law.” Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ N.V. RAMANA, J. 11th September, 2009 bcj