IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.8301 of 2000 Between: Smt Nalabothula Lalitha, W/o Sri N.Balavenkata Chennu, Plot.No.72, Sri Krishna Colony, Krupa Complex, Safilguda, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Competent Authority/Vice Chairman, Managing Director, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, 1-8-323, Paigah Palace, Police Lines, Sec'bad 500 003 2 Commissioner, Municipality Malakajgiri, Malkajgiri, R.R.District. 3 Sri Srinivas Builders, Rep by its Managing Partner, Sri T.Chalapathi, R/o. Plot No. 61 & 62, Sri Krishnanagar Colony, Near Krupa Complex, Safilguda, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the premises bearing Municipal No. 27-16/11/1 and 27-16/11/2 (Old), New No. 27- 12/8/1, on Plot Nos. 61 and 62, in survey No. 86, of Srinivasa Apartments, Near Krupa Complex, Krishna Nagar Colony, Neredmet, Malkajgiri Municipality by declaring the notice No. 2530/MP2/HUDA/Plg/99, dt. 3-5-2K of the ﬁrst respondent is illegal, void and unjustified in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.R.BALARAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.8301 of 2000 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that she purchased property bearing Sh.Nos.S1 and S2 to an extent of 200 sq. ft. and 315 sq. ft. respectively in the ground ﬂoor along with undivided share of interest in the land to an extent of 47.66 sq. yards bearing Municipal Nos.27-16/11/1 and 27-16/11/2 (old), New No.27- 12/8/1, in Plot Nos.61 and 62 in Sy.No.86, admeasuring 620 sq. yards situated at Krupa Complex, Neredmet, Malkajgiri Municipality. It is stated that the 3rd respondent after obtaining permission constructed 20 ﬂats by leaving set backs as per the sanctioned plan. It is stated that the petitioner is not the purchaser of the 4th ﬂoor or any other divided portion of the said building, but, however, without giving any notice and without initiating appropriate action against the developer and other owners, the 1st respondent issued notice, dated 03-05-2000, stating that the said commercial complex has been developed in deviation of the sanctioned plan and therefore, the petitioner was issued a show-cause notice as to why the deviations and violations in construction of the said building could not be demolished. Questioning the said show-cause notice, dated 03- 05-2000, this writ petition has been filed. A counter has been ﬁled stating that the 3rd respondent obtained permission for construction of cellar + ground = 1st floor + 2nd ﬂoor with only 10 units, but it constructed ground + 4 ﬂoors with 20 units and, therefore, the said building has been constructed in deviation of the sanctioned plan. It is stated that the respondents do not know anything about the applications said to have been ﬁled by the petitioner and others for availing BRS scheme as per G.O.Ms.No.419, dated 30-07-1998. It is stated that the constructions made by the 3rd respondent in respect of the entire building are in gross violation of the sanctioned plan and, therefore, the impugned show-cause notice has been issued, which was served on the watchman of the petitioner. I am of the opinion that the show-cause notice issued by the 1st respondent is addressed to the 3rd respondent alone. But, however, the said show-cause notice has been received by the petitioner through watchman. In fact, it is stated that the petitioner filed an explanation, dated 06-05-2000. If that be so, I am of the opinion that it is for the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the said explanation. But, however, I do not see any acknowledgment of proof of ﬁling the said explanation. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is just and proper to give an opportunity to the petitioner to ﬁle a detailed explanation disclosing subsequent events that have been taken place. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to ﬁle an explanation to the show-cause notice, dated 03-05-2000, before respondents 1 and 2 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On ﬁling such explanation, the same may be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 29-08-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ESWAR}