THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32228 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent and its officials in demolishing a part of upper floor of the house (2nd floor) bearing Door No.39-18-85/11 situated at Survey No.34/2 of Madhavadhara Village, Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The averments, in brief, stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of an extent of 335 Square Yards of land along with a house therein bearing Door No.39-18-85/11 situated at Survey No.34/2 of Madhavadhara Village. After obtaining necessary building permission from the respondent corporation, the petitioner started making construction of the house. While so, on 12.09.2011 at 10:00 AM, all of a sudden the respondent officials came to the property in question and attempted to demolish a part of the upper floor of the house (2nd floor). The petitioner resisted them and brought the same to the notice of the respondent herein. The respondent has not issued any notice as contemplated under Sections 452 or 636 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”). While matter stood thus, on 03.12.2011 at about 10:00 AM once again the subordinates of the respondent corporation came to the property in question and attempted to demolish a part of the upper floor of the house (2nd floor). Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner obtained sanctioned plan for construction of the house, the respondents are trying to demolish the same without there being any notice. 4. On the other hand, Sri N. Ranga Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondent, contended that the petitioner has constructed the building in violation of the sanctioned plan; and that after following due process of law necessary action would be initiated against the petitioner. 5. There cannot be any dispute that the petitioner has to construct the building in accordance with the sanctioned plan. Though it is stated that the petitioner has obtained necessary building construction permission from the respondent vide B.A.No.12880 of 2009, he has not specifically stated that he made constructions strictly in accordance with the sanctioned plan. Therefore, it is for the respondent to take appropriate decision, if there are any deviations in making constructions over the property in question. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to issue notice under Sections 452 and 636 of the Act to the petitioner, in case there is any deviation in making constructions over the property in question as against the sanctioned plan. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J December 08, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Dated: 08.12.2011 PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32228 OF 2011 Between: M. Venkata Rao ..... PETITIONER AND Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32228 OF 2011 December 08, 2011 MD