THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.30651 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the notice, dated 05.11.2011, bearing UC Nos.14/2011 and 15/2011 issued under Sections 42(1) and 43(1) of A.P.Urban Development Act read with Section 452 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, to set aside the same. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the petitioners are the brothers. Petitioner No.1 is the absolute owner and possessor of the property to an extent of 300 sq.yards in R.S.No.81/2, 74/4 and 74/5 of Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada having purchased the same under registered sale deeds. Likewise, petitioner No.2 is the owner and possessor of the property to an extent of 298 sq.yards in R.S.No.81/2, 74/4 and 74/5 of Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada having purchased the same under registered sale deeds. On application made by the petitioners, the respondent accorded permission for construction of Ground, First and Second Floors. Accordingly, the petitioners made constructions and the said properties are being assessed for tax and as on today, no arrears are due to the respondent Corporation. While so, some people enimical to the petitioners, got published news twice in Eenadu Telugu daily news papers on 14.11.2011 and 17.11.2011 stating that the constructions were made contrary to the approved plans and the authorities are maintaining silence without taking any action. On 05.11.2011, the respondent issued the impugned notice stating that the petitioners made construction of second floor without obtaining permission from the respondent. The approved plan shows that the petitioners are permitted to raise constructions of Ground, First and Second Floors. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Heard both sides. 4. By virtue of the impugned notice, dated 05.11.2011, the petitioners were called upon to give an explanation within five days for violation of the approved plan in making construction of the second floor. The case of the petitioners is that they obtained permission on 31.12.1997 and therefore, they pray to grant two weeks’ time to give a suitable explanation to the impugned notice. The time given in the impugned notice may not be sufficient for the petitioners to give an explanation in view of the fact that the petitioners have obtained sanction about thirteen years back. A reasonable time can be given to the petitioners so that they could give a proper explanation to the impugned notice. Hence, the petitioners have to give an explanation within two (2) weeks from today to the impugned notice, dated 05.11.2011, and thereafter, appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondent in accordance with law. 5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 18th November, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.30651 OF 2011 Date:18.11.2011 AMD