THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.31267 OF 2011 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue Writ of Mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 to 4 to consider the representations, dated 03.06.2011, 06.07.2011 and 07.09.2011, of the petitioner and take appropriate action against respondent No.5 for his deviations of approved plan and unauthorized construction of six pent houses on the terrace portion and conversion of parking lot into a shopping complex in “Vijayadurga Residency Apartment”, at Vijayadurga Colony, Kadapa. 2. The flat owners of “Vijayadurga Residency”, Kadapa formed into an association known as “Sri Vijayadurga Apartments Owners Welfare Association, Kadapa” and its main object is to take over the complex from the builder/promoter and manage, protect and maintain all common facilities and amenities for the beneficial enjoyment of the residents in the complex. Respondent No.5-builder/promoter obtained building permission from respondent No.1 with certain conditions for construction of residential apartment with stilt floor, ground floor and four upper floors in S.Nos.307/C, 310/B, 293/A in Vijaya Durga Colony. Conditions 8 and 11 of the sanctioned plan are in respect of the covered parking area and extra floors or pent houses. Respondent No.5 completed the construction and sold away residential flats to 75 individuals. The builder himself was in management of the complex though the flats were sold to individuals. When the registrations are made, the purchasers are put in possession of their respective flats. As the builder is in management, he constructed six pent houses on the terrace and converted the parking lot on the front side of the apartment into shopping complex as a result of which, the apartment owners are denied their right of access on the terrace and right of parking. No approval is obtained either for construction of pent houses or for conversion of parking lot into shopping complex and thus, the construction made by the builder is contrary to the provisions of the Act. Though the petitioner made number of representations to respondent Nos.1 to 4, no action has been initiated. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.5 is making constructions contrary to the sanctioned plan. 4. Respondent No.5 filed a caveat. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 contended that respondent No.5 is making constructions in accordance with the sanctioned plan. 5. A owner or builder is supposed to construct a building or a flat in accordance with the sanctioned/approved plan given by the competent authority. The petitioner stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that respondent No.5 is making constructions contrary to the sanctioned plan. Therefore, respondent No.1 is directed to verify whether respondent No.5 is making constructions contrary to the sanctioned plan or not and thereafter, take appropriate decision in accordance with law after giving notice to respondent No.5 calling for explanation furnishing the details of deviations as against the sanctioned plan. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 29th November, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.31267 OF 2011 Date:29.11.2011 AMD