THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.9449 of 2006 DATED: 28-04-2006 BETWEEN Praveen Yadav, son of Nathabnai Yadav and others …PETITIONERS AND The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Represented by its Commissioner, Hyderabad. …RESPONDENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.9449 of 2006 ORDER: Petitioners seek a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in issuing the notice, dated 01.04.2006, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the owner and possessors of the shop bearing door No.6 in the premises Bearing No. 3-4- -416, Hi Line Pratap Towers, Lingampally, Hyderabad. He further contends that the respondent, without issuing any show cause notice, issued a notice dated 01.04.2006 under Section 636 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, stating that the petitioners have made unauthorized constructions in cellar/stilt floor and accordingly, they were directed to remove the said unauthorized structures within three days. Hence, I am of the opinion that issuing notice under Section 636 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) is in respect of the buildings, which have been constructed after obtaining permission for construction of the cellar, ground floor and upper floors, the relevant provision to issue a notice is under Section 452 of the Act. If there is any deviation or conversion, it is for the respondent to issue a show cause notice under Section 452 of the Act. But, without issuing any show cause notice, straight away a notice under Section 636 of the Act, as if the constructions have been made without any permission, has been issued directing the petitioner to remove the structures within three days. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned notice dated 01-04-2006 is directed to be treated as a show cause notice only permitting the petitioners to file a representation/explanation within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and till such representation/explanation is considered and appropriate orders are passed and communicated to the petitioners, the respondent shall not remove or demolish the shop of the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Dated: 28-04-2006 RNS