IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 25751 of 2008 Between: APHB Towers Owners Association Opp. Sri Ghantasala Music College, Durgapuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District, Rep by its General Secretary, Sri G. Trinathababu S/o. Sri Bayyanna ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Municipal Corporation Vijayawada, Rep. by its Commissioner 2 The A.P. Housing Board Rep. by its Executive Engineer (Housing), Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada-12 .....RESPONDENTS 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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in proposing to take the petitioners site of an extent of 113 sq. yards (measuring 72.9' x 14.0') covered by compound Wall, Water Sump and Bore Well etc., on the northern side of the petitioners housing complex situated at Sy.No. 123/3P, Opp. Ghantasala Music College, Durgapuram, Satyanarayana Puram, Vijayawada, Krishna District for the purpose of development of BRTS Road at Satyanarayana Puram, Vijayawada as illegal, arbitrary discriminatory and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to drop all further proceedings in this regard. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.SIVA REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1 : SMT.G.JHANSI Counsel for Respondent No.2: SRI D. RANGANATH KUMAR. The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is an association with registration No.209 of 2007 under the Societies Registration Act 35 of 2001. The said association consists of the flat owners of Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Towers. According to it, the Housing Board has constructed the building/flats and compound wall in accordance with the plan approved by the first respondent. The compound wall on the northern side was constructed by leaving 7 feet land for the purpose of road widening, which may take place in future. However, the first respondent issued a letter dated 06.10.2008 stating that an extent of 113 square yards of land is required for the purpose of road widening and drainage for effective junction development at Sangeetha Kalasala Centre. Thereafter, the petitioner association made a representation dated 16.10.2008 to the first respondent seeking some clarifications in the letter dated 06.10.2008 and also in the copy of the master plan. Without responding to the said representation, the respondents are proceeding with the work of road widening. Hence the petitioner association filed the present writ petition. Heard both the Counsel. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1, on instructions, stated across the bar that widening of the road etc., will not be done without following due process of law. In the light of the said submission of the learned standing counsel, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of, at the stage of admission, with a direction to the respondents to follow the due process of law while acquiring the land in question, which is required for the purpose of road widening. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Date:26.11.2008 sj ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}