IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 5999 of 2005 Between: S.V. Krishnamurthy, S/o. Late S. Venkatappa @ Chinnappa, R/o. H.No.6/182-A, Puttaparthy Village, Puttaparthy Mandal, Ananthapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND the Vice Chairman, Sri Satya Sai Urban Development Authority, Puttaparthy, Ananthapur 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 Issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respodnent in issuing proceedings UC No.1/2005/UC, dt. 23.02.2005 in Form III as illegal, arbitrary, bad and contrary to the proceedings R.B.A.No./67/97/D/RB/SSUDA, dt. 5.11.1996 and declare action of the 1st respondent as unauthorised and opposed to public policy and violative of principles of natural justice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRINIVASULU Counsel for the Respondent No.: . None appeared HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 5999 OF 2005 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner questions the order issued by the respondent in proceedings UCNo. 1/2005/UC, dated 23.2.2005 in Form III, directing him to remove illegal developments made with regard to the construction of the third floor and the existing ground plus two floors at premises D.No. IV, 182-A, Yenumalapalli Village, Puttaparthy Mandal, Ananthapur District. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of House bearing D.No. IV, 182-A , Yenumalapalli Village and he has constructed ground plus three floors after obtaining permission vide R.B.A.No. 67/97/B/RB/S.S.U.D.A and after paying the compound fee for the construction of the three floors permission was granted for the construction of ground plus third floor and the construction was completed in the year 1997 itself. It is stated that the unauthorized constructions have to be regularized and therefore, based on the false complaint issuing the show cause notice is illegal. Counter has been filed stating that the petitioner obtained permission for ground plus two floors but not third floor and therefore, the show cause notice was issued. It is further stated that with regard to the regularization of third floor on 5.11.1997 the records are not available. It is further stated that the petitioner has submitted his explanation with regard to the regularisation proceedings for the construction of third floor and the said records are not available in the office as the records in the office are said to have been destroyed in arson which happened on 24.1.2005. The learned counsel for the petitioner also filed proceedings R.B.A.No. 67/97/B/RB/SSUDA dated 5.11.1996-97 for regularisation of the ground plus three floors but the said proceedings have not been disputed. The counter filed by the respondent is vogue and not specific and the respondent himself stated that the records are not available in the office and therefore, I am of the opinion that in view of the said proceedings of regularizing the construction of third floor, it is not open for the respondent to demolish the third floor. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to take any action contrary to the orders of the Vice Chairman, Sri Sathya Sai Urban Development Authority, Puttaparthi, Anantapur in proceedings RBA No. 67197/B/RB/SSUDA dated 5.11.1996-97. However, it is open for the respondents to take appropriate action if the said order is not genuine after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. No order as to costs. ____________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Date: 01.04.2008 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through S.H.O, PS Kasipet, Adilabad District, 2 2CCs to G.P. for Home, High Court buildings, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad 3 2CD copies