IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWELTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 6995 of 2001 Between: 1 Boggarapu Yogaiah S/o.Basavaiah R/o.Viswanathapuram, Podili, Prakasam District. 2 Golla Seethamma W/o.Subbarao R/o.Viswanathapuram, Podili, Prakasam District. 3 Galli Seetharamulu W/o.Vekateswara Reddy Viswanathapuram, Podili, Prakasam District. 4 Mandela Prabhakara Reddy S/o. Lakshmi Reddy R/o.Viswanathapuram, Podili, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Roads & Buildings Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Podili, Prakasam District. .....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 issue a Writ or order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in marking a part of the front portion of the houses and premises of the petitioners bearing Nos. 10-146, 10-177, 10-178(A) and 10-178/1 respectively, situated at Viswanathapuram, Podili, Prakasam District, for demolition and in seeking to demolish the same as illegal, arbitrary, unwarranted and violative of the principles of natural justice, and contrary to Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.BRAHMA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MADHURI} HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.6995 of 2001 O R D E R: The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that without any notice or opportunity, the front portions of their respective houses are sought to be demolished by the respondents. 2. The petitioners, who are four in number, in the affidavit, alleged that each one of them is owner of their respective houses bearing Door Nos.10-146, 10-177, 10-178(A) and 10-178/1, respectively, situate at Viswanadhapuram, Podili, Prakasam District. 3. The petitioners further alleged in the affidavit that they have taken municipal permission in December, 1999 and they have constructed the houses at a huge cost. On 06-04-2001, the District Surveyor, Taluk Surveyor and Sub Divisional Surveyor visited their houses and marked front portions of each of the houses for the purpose of proposed demolition and widening of the 30’ road. Since the petitioners were not put to any notice and opportunity, they had approached this Court by this writ petition. 4. On 12-04-2001 while admitting this writ petition, this Court granted interim stay of dispossession of the petitioners until further orders and the said order continues to be in force. 5. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit alleging that the petitioners have encroached on R & B road margin and encroachment by each of the petitioners is mentioned in para-2 of the counter affidavit. It is further alleged that in order to clear the said unauthorized encroachment, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Podili, had issued notices to all the petitioners on 16-03-2001 and as there was no explanation from any of the petitioners, the action for demolition was being taken. 6. When this writ petition was heard on an earlier occasion on 30-10-2008, a direction was issued to the Mandal Revenue Officer to produce the record to substantiate the allegation of service of notice, dated 16-03-2001. The petitioners have also filed a reply affidavit denying that they have not received any such notice. 7. The learned Government Pleader for the Roads and Buildings has produced the records, but he fairly submits that their record does not show any such notice as alleged in the counter affidavit nor there is any acknowledgment of service on any of the petitioners. 8. In the circumstances, the contention of the petitioners deserves to be accepted. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with the following direction: In the event of the respondents desiring to acquire/demolish whole or part of the petitioners’ houses as aforesaid, the respondents shall follow due process of law and after giving notice and opportunity to the petitioners they shall take appropriate action in accordance with law. 9. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ 12th December 2008 kvr