THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.25691 OF 2002 DATED: 10-04-2006 BETWEEN M/s. N.C.L. Homes, Having its registered officer at Room No.614, Raghava Ratna Towers, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hyderabad rep. by its Managing Director, P. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o. Sri P. Ram Bhadra Raju, R/o. Hyderabad. …PETITIONER AND Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Rep. by its Commissioner, having its Office at Municipal Complex, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. …RESPONDENT ORDER: Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent corporation in attempting to demolish the structures raised in premises bearing No.10-2-289/115, situated at Shantinagar, Hyderabad and interfering with the construction being undertaken at the said site, without following the provisions contemplated under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) as illegal and arbitrary. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner concern is engaged in the business of construction activity and in the course of its business, the petitioner entered into agreement of sale-cum-General Power of Attorney with one Sri M.K.M. Kashinath vide Doc.No.1435/2001 dated 04.06.2001 for premises No.10-2-289/115 admeasuring 714.67 sq. yards at Shantinagar, Hyderabad and accordingly applied for permission for construction of stilt for parking + 5 upper floors in accordance with Sections 428 to 433of the Act. The respondent corporation after due inspection granted permission vide permit No.126/92 under file No.388/CSC/TP4/2001 dated 16.04.2002. After obtaining permission the petitioner concern started construction as per sanctioned plan making arrangements for sufficient parking space and leaving sufficient open spaces. While so, the official of the respondent corporation visited the site of the petitioner on 22.12.2002 and threatened to demolish certain structures said to have been constructed in violation of the sanctioned plan. He further submits that even if there are any violations the respondents are required to issue sufficient notice as contemplated under Sections 461 and 452 of the Act and thereafter, final orders under Section 636 of the Act and they are authorized to take action only after considering the petitioner’s explanation to the said notice. No counter has been filed and admittedly no proceedings have been issued to the petitioner. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent is directed to inspect and verify as to whether the petitioner made constructions with reference to the sanction plan and if there are any deviations, issue appropriate notice pointing out the deviations calling for the objections from the petitioner and on receipt of such objections, appropriate orders may be passed. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 10, 2006 DSK