THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.10890 of 2001 Date:20.01.2010 Between: D. Rohit Sharma. ..Petitioner And The Commissioner and others. ..Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.10890 of 2001 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the first respondent vide Letter No.402/195/Legal/MCH/2001-1422 dated 22.05.2001 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice, and consequently to direct the first respondent not to give effect to the same. According to the petitioner, he had constructed a commercial complex and approached respondent Nos.2 and 3, their mother late Smt.P.R.K. Menon for developing the property bearing house No.10-3-32/13 situated at East Marredpally, Secunderabad. After settling the terms and conditions, a development agreement dated 22.10.1995 was entered between the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3 and even before that respondent Nos.2 and 3 had obtained municipal permission i.e., on 30.08.1995. Further, respondent Nos.2 and 3 at the time of entering into development agreement had themselves clearly agreed that the petitioner will be entitled to construct additional floors and get it regularized by the Corporation by paying the appropriate regularization charges. Thus, the petitioner started construction and deviations were regularized by the first respondent with the consent and cooperation of the owners. According to the petitioner, in view of the agreement with respondent Nos.2 and 3, he had raised additional structures i.e., fourth floor and pent house in fifth floor. The first respondent regularized the additional structures under permit Nos.20238, 20239 and 20240 dated 18.07.1998. The said regularization was made with the consent and authorization given by respondent Nos.2 and 3 as per the development agreement. While that being so, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have submitted a letter to the Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Government of Andhra Pradesh, seeking regularization. In fact, the petitioner along with respondent Nos.2 and 3 filed a suit against the first respondent in O.S.No.102 of 1997 before I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, for perpetual injunction. As the construction was going on, the first respondent tried to interfere with the same and while so respondent Nos.2 and 3 developed evil designs against the petitioner and with an intention to make illegal gains to themselves over and above the agreed terms under the development agreement and demanding an amount of Rs.10,39,352/- from the petitioner. As the petitioner refused to pay the said amount, respondent Nos.2 and 3 started harassing the petitioner and with the same intention filed O.S.No.707 of 1998 before XI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, for various reliefs. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of their being building regularization scheme (BRS) permits, the same are now cancelled stating that it was obtained for stilt plus three upper floors in a single site of 473.00 sq. mts for a single unit, but having unauthorizedly built two additional floors i.e., fourth and fifth floors with several deviations, BRS was obtained falsely representing that the petitioner constructed three independent and separate units of stilt plus five upper floors each in three separate independent sites in an area of 126.00 sq. mts, 154.00 sq. mts and 154.10 sq. mts each in order to take undue advantage of G.O.Ms.No.243, MA, dated 23.05.1996, for the purpose of fraudulently showing each unit in an area of below 200.00 sq. mts each. As seen from the docket proceedings, wile admitting the writ petition on 07.06.2001, this Court granted interim stay and therefore, there could be no threat of demolition. It is submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition several G.Os. were issued for regularizing the structures raised and the petitioner has made a detailed representation in this regard on 15.07.2008 and the same is pending. Under the fact and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner dated 15.07.2008 as per law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained as to the nature of the building. No costs. ________________ (C.V. RAMULU, J) 20th January, 2010 GHN