IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 26903 of 2001 BETWEEN: 1 Jai Ramaiah, S/o. Late Shivaiah, R/o. 1-4-886 (Ward 9), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 2 Ch. Subrahmanyeswara Rao, S/o. Buchaiah, R/o. 1-4-880-A (Ward 9), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 3 K. Gopal, S/o. Annayya Naikar, R/o. 1-4-860 (Ward 9), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 4 M. Srimannayayana, S/o. Jai Ramaiah, R/o.1-4-887 (Ward 9), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 5 Mrs M Vanajakshi, W/o. Saibaba, R/o. 1-4-887/1 (Ward 9), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 6 M. Subba Rao, S/o. Ramaiah, R/o. 1-4-903 (Ward 9), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 7 Mrs Hymavathi, W/o. Venkateswar Rao, R/o.1-2-319 (Ward 5), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 8 Mrs Khaja Begum, W/o. Shaik Saleem, R/o. 1-4-884 (Ward 9), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. 9 Mrs Ratnakumari, W/o. Basavapunna Rao, R/o. 1-4-1149 (Ward 12), Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 Government of A.P., Rep. by the Secretary Municipal Administration & Urban Development, (J2) Dept., Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner & Director of Municipal Administration, Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector, Nizamabad District. 4 The Commissioner of Bodhan Municipality, Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and call for the records and declare the G.O.MS. 255 M.A. dated 13.6.2001 of Municipal Administration AND Urban development (J2) Department as illegal arbitrary and without jurisdiction and quash the same in so far as the same is against the interest of the petitioners herein and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.S.C.RANGAPPA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. MR. RADHAKRISHNA POLISETTY SC FOR MPL The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioners question the various notices issued by the Commissioner, Bodhan Municipality dated 31.10.2001 in Lr.No.G1/621/2001 demanding them to pay amounts towards land cost according to G.O.Ms.No.194; Development Charges as per Council Resolution; Construction charges as per G.O.Ms.No.255and interest as per G.O.Ms.No.255 and encroachment fee, amounting to Rs.8,825/-. Petitioners also question the legality and validity of G.O.Ms.No.255 M.A. dated 13.06.2001 in demanding the interest amount. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would not like to pursue the writ petition questioning the legality and validity of G.O.Ms.No.255 dated 13.06.2001 but they would like to honour the notices issued by the fourth respondent pursuant to the resolution passed by the Municipal Council and that they would like to pay the entire demanded amount. He further submits that pursuant to the interim order granted in WPMP.No.34030 of 2001 dated 31.12.2001 subject to the condition of the petitioners depositing 50% of the amount demanded, it is stated that the 50% amount has already been deposited within the stipulated time and thereafter, the interim order was made absolute by order dated 26.10.2004. 3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the fourth respondent submits that the third petitioner has not paid the 50% of the demanded amount as per the orders of this Court. 4. Now that all the petitioners want to pay the entire demanded amount, there cannot be any justification on the part of the respondents in not accepting the said amount and in not taking further course of action. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are permitted to deposit the entire demanded amount, after deducting the 50% amount, if already paid, as per the notices issued by the fourth respondent dated 31.10.2001 and if the entire amount is paid appropriate action may be taken in accordance with law. However, it is open to the respondents to accept the amount only from the persons to whom such notices have been issued but not from the third parties. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J July 28, 2008 DSK