IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 1368 of 2009 Between: Goli Satya Shailendra S/o.Dr. Goli Keshava Rao R/o.65-1-6, Narsanna Nagar, Kakinada, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Kakinada Municipal Corporation, represented by its Commissioner, Kakinada, E.G. District. .....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 declare the action of the respondent herein in trying to demolish construction of the building bearing No.2-32-12, situated in Ward No.2 (old) new No.5, Block-14 (old) (new Block-2) bearing assessment No.2029/8R 775 (old) (new No.1060028940) situated at Srinagar Colony, Suryaraopet, Kakinada, East Godavari District, without disposing the BRS application dt. 15.7.2008 as illegal, arbitrary and unjust by issuing appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.R.S.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.NAGESWARA REDDY The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.NO. 1368 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. Petitioner purchased house bearing No. 2-32-12, situated in Ward No.2 ( old) new No. 5, Block –14(old), Block 2 new situated at Srinagar Colony, Suryaraopet, Kakinada, East Godavari District. He demolished the existing house and proceeded with the construction of ground plus three floors after obtaining necessary sanction from the Respondent Corporation. During the process of construction, he made certain deviations. He filed an application bearing No. BPS/41/1290/2008, dated 15-7-2008 seeking regularization of the deviations made by him. He also paid necessary amount by way of demand draft, dated 14-7-2008. His application is stated to be pending. While so, the respondent-Corporation, according to the petitioner, is contemplating to demolish the constructions made by him in deviation of the sanctioned plan. Therefore, he approached this Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. When the writ petition came for admission, Sri S. Nageswar Reddy, learned standing counsel of Kakinada Municipal Corporation, takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. The fact that the petitioner filed an application for regularization of the deviation made by him in the process of construction is not in dispute. 5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to demolish the construction made by the petitioner in deviation of the sanctioned plan pending consideration of his application filed under ‘Building Penalization Scheme’. No order as to costs. _____________________________ Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy 30th January, 2009. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.NO. 1368 OF 2009 30th January, 2009.