IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19971 of 2007 Between: Smt. Sanapathi Rama Laxmi, W/o. Leeladhara Rao, R/o. D.No. 7-93, Chinamushidiwada, Pendurthi, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. byits Commissioner, Visakhapatnam. 2 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, pendurthi, Visakhapatnam. .....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 will be pleased to to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to demolish the structures Constructed by the petitioner herein in the site measuring an extent of Ac. 0-04 cents situated in S.No. 109/17 of Chinamushdiwada Village, Pendurthi, Visakhapatnam illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14,21 and 305-A of the Constitution of India and pass such other and further orders as this HOn'ble Court may deem fit and proper inthe circusmtances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.V.N.NARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by Smt.Sanapathi Rama Laxmi with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to demolish the structures put up by her in the site admeasuring Ac.0.04 cents comprising Survey No.109/17 of Chinamushdiwada village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal and unreasonable. 2. The petitioner is the owner of an extent of Ac.0.04 cents comprising Survey No.109/17 of Chinamushdiwada village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District having been allotted to her by the Government. She put up certain constructions after obtaining due permission from the 1st respondent-Corporation. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the 1st respondent-Corporation is contemplating to remove the constructions made by her without following the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-Corporation. 4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent- Corporation, on instructions, submits that the 1st respondent- Corporation will proceed with the demolition of unauthorized constructions, if any put by the petitioner, after following the due procedure contemplated under the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. 5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage directing the 1st respondent-Corporation to follow the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 in the event of the constructions made by the petitioner are required to be demolished. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:18th June, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}