THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.33354 of 2010 DT. 30.12.2010 Between: Afroz Nabi Khan … Petitioner And The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation & another … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Parsa Ananth Nageswar Rao Counsel for respondent: Sri P Radhakrishna Reddy, SC for GHMC The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.33354 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner who claims to be the owner and possessor of plot bearing H No. 16-11-16/L/9/A, Teegalaguda, Malakpet, Hyderabad, has filed this writ petition, seeking compensation in respect of part of the land which was allegedly taken by the respondents and further alleging that respondents are taking steps to demolish the constructions made on the said plot, as illegal. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner and possessor or land admeasuring 592 sq.yards in plot bearing H No. 16-11-16/L/9/A, Teegalaguda, Malakpet, Hyderabad by virtue of an agreement of sale dated 10.11.1994. During the year 1999, on account of change in the master plan, the respondents encroached a part of the said land and demolished the basement structures without notice or intimation and without paying any compensation. On the remaining part of the land, he has constructed a house with compound wall and the same has been assessed to property tax. The respondents have issued a show cause notice dated 30.11.2010 under Section 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, calling upon the petitioner to remove the illegal and unauthorized erection of AC sheets shed, which has been constructed without any permission. The petitioner states that he has submitted his explanations on 6.12.2010 and 21.12.2010 thereto. In the said explanations, while reiterating the earlier alleged taking over of the land, the petitioner explained that he has erected the house with compound wall to safeguard the land and also explained that he has approached the authorities for regularization. So far authorities have not passed any final orders on the explanations filed by the petitioner. Apprehending demolition of the construction even without passing final orders, in order to protect the constructions till the decision is taken, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Mr R Radha Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent-GHMC. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents on instructions submitted that the representations filed by the petitioner are pending consideration and so far, no decision has been taken. Having regard to the same, until the concerned authority considers the explanations submitted by the petitioner on 6.12.2010 and 21.12.2010 and a final decision is taken thereon, it is appropriate that the illegal constructions pointed out in the notice dated 30.11.2010 should not be demolished. In view of the above, it is directed that the concerned authority shall take appropriate decision on the explanations submitted on 6.12.2010 and 21.12.2010 by the petitioner in response to the notice dated 30.11.2010 and until a final decision is taken thereon, the constructions pointed out in the said notice shall not be demolished. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner seeks permission to keep open the issue, relating to compensation so as to enable him to agitate his rights before the appropriate forum. Hence, it is left open for the petitioner to agitate his claim for compensation before the appropriate forum. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _____________ NOUSHAD ALI,J DATE: 30.12.2010 TVK Note : Issue operative portion by wire at party’s costs. B/o Tvk THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.33354 of 2010 DT. 30.12.2010 Note: Operative portion by wire.