THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.27981 of 2008 Date: 15.03.2011 Between : G. Kumariah .… Petitioner and The Executive Officer, Secunderabad Contonment Board, Secunderabad, Hyderabad and another. …. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.27981 of 2008 ORDER : Heard Sri N. Mukunda Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as Sri Y.V. Ravi Prasad, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-Contonment Board and Sri C. Hari Preeth, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, and with the consent of all the counsel, the writ petition is being disposed of. 2. This writ petition has been filed complaining the inaction of the 1st respondent that despite its order dated 29.8.2007 in Lr.No.SCB/EB/Appeal/P.No.13/Seshachala CHS/2992, in removing the illegal encroachment and construction of wall and gate made by the 2nd respondent in the public place situated between Plot Nos.12 and 13, Seshachala Colony, West Marredpally, Secunderabad, as arbitrary and illegal. 3. A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition shows that the 2nd respondent encroached upon the public drain and erected a brick wall and gate on the open space between Plot Nos.12 and 13 of the aforesaid colony. The 1st respondent, therefore, issued a notice calling upon the 2nd respondent to remove the said illegal construction. The 2nd respondent challenged the said notice in an appeal No.SCB/EB/Appeal/P.No.13/Seshachala CHS/2992, and the same has been rejected by the 1st respondent by order dated 29.8.2007. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent, inter alia, stating that the demolition of the illegal construction made by the 2nd respondent could not be made in view of the pendency of the suit O.S.No.968 of 2007 on the file of the XI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad. 5. During the course of hearing, it is stated that the said suit was also dismissed on 27.12.2010 and the objections, if any, for removal of the illegal construction does no longer exist. The learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent, therefore, states that it would take further steps for demolition of the unauthorized construction. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent does not dispute the above said facts. 6. Indisputably, the 2nd respondent made illegal construction on the public place and as a consequence of the dismissal of his appeal, it is incumbent upon him to remove the same. However, he instituted a suit O.S.No.968 of 2007 on the file of the XI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad and obtained orders interdicting the demolition of the said illegal construction. It is now stated that the said suit was also dismissed on 27.12.2010. 7. In the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed directing the 1st respondent-Contonment Board to take steps for demolition of the unauthorized construction made by the 2nd respondent in the afore said public place. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 15.03.2011. Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.27981 of 2008 15.03.2011 (Msr)