THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.29223 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in issuing notice, dated 22.08.2011, purportedly under Section 461 read with Section 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) and served on the petitioner on 24.10.2011 as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, set aside the same as null and void. 2. The petitioner stated that he purchased 579 sq.yards of vacant site equivalent to 5211 sq.feet, constituting Plot No.175, MIG (T.S.No.45) of China Waltair Village, Visakhapatnam under a registered document on 04.10.1989 from one H.N.Murthy and that his vendor applied for permission for construction of cellar, ground + two floors in the said site and the sanctioned plan was given in B.A.No.1024/89 dated 27.06.1989. He undertook construction immediately after purchase and constructed three flats in each floor, totally nine flats and sold them to others. Out of the nine purchasers, only six purchasers purchased car parking area which came to 480 sq.feet, and he was left with 3011 sq.feet of vacant space in cellar portion. The remaining vacant space was utilized for dhyan mandir, a small room for watchman and also a two bed room flat. The petitioner paid the penal amount as prescribed. He also complied with the formality of submitting B.R.S. application and he has been paying the municipal taxes. Later, the impugned notice is issued directing the petitioner to furnish the title deeds pertaining to the site in question and valid plan copy in respect of the constructions made in stilt floor and third floor within three days from the date of receipt of the notice under Section 452 of the Act. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the constructions are being made in accordance with the sanctioned plan obtained by his vendor and there is no deviation and hence, he prays to quash the impugned notice. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 contended that for the impugned notice, the petitioner has given an explanation and respondent No.2 has to take an appropriate decision in accordance with G.H.M.C. Act, rules and building regulations. 5. The factual matrix is not in dispute. According to the petitioner, he made constructions in accordance with building plan approved by Municipality. His further case is that his vendor obtained a sanctioned plan for making the constructions. Whether the constructions are in accordance with the plan or not has to be verified by respondent No.2. By virtue of the impugned notice, the petitioner was directed to produce the title deeds pertaining to the site in question and also the valid sanctioned plan copy for the constructions made. For that purpose, the petitioner has already given his explanation. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to take appropriate decision in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the bye laws made thereunder and building regulations within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 01st November, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.29223 OF 2011 Date:01.11.2011 AMD