THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 32603 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent in issuing proceedings bearing B.A.No.28/2011/G1, dated 24.11.2011, under Sections 452 (1) & (2) and 461 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondent not to demolish the existing constructions made by the petitioner in Door No. 19-12-249 in Survey No.241/1, 2 and 3 situated at Biragipatteda, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows: The husband of the petitioner was an employee in Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam (for short ‘TTD’). In the year 1985, TTD allotted house site to her husband bearing Plot No.249 in Survey No.241/1, 2 and 3 vide proceedings dated 12.01.1985. Her husband died in harness on 02.06.2005. Thereafter, she made an application for transfer of the above plot on her name by fulfilling all the conditions and the same was transferred on her name. Later, she made applications dated 03.02.2011 and 23.02.2011 to the respondent Corporation seeking permission to construct stilt + 3 floors of the building for residential purpose. The respondent Corporation granted permission vide proceedings dated 05.03.2011 and pursuant to the said permission, the petitioner constructed the residential building. While the matter stood thus, the impugned proceedings were issued by the respondent stating that the building construction is contrary to the sanctioned plan and that fourth and fifth floors were constructed without obtaining permission, and accordingly called for explanation of the petitioner within a period of seven days, failing which, the said constructions will be removed by the Corporation. After receiving the impugned order, even though she approached the respondent authorities and requested them to re-measure the deviations, they have not taken any action. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner constructed the building after obtaining permission from the respondent Corporation and that the deviations pointed out in the impugned order are in correct and hence, he prays to issue a direction to the respondent not to demolish the building in question. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent contended that the petitioner constructed the building without obtaining any sanction from the Municipality; that there are certain deviations in making the constructions and that appropriate decision has to be taken in pursuance of the impugned notice and hence, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. 5. The allegation is that the petitioner has constructed fourth and fifth floors against the sanctioned plan. Hence, the impugned notice was issued. However, the petitioner has not submitted any explanation to the impugned notice and straight away filed the present writ petition. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to pass appropriate orders on the impugned notice duly considering the explanation of the petitioner, to be submitted by the petitioner, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till a decision is taken and an order is passed, the constructions made by the petitioner near Door No. 19-12-249 in Survey Nos.241/1,2 and 3, situated at Biragipatteda, Tirupati, Chittoor District, shall not be demolished. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU,J Dated: 20.12.2011 va