THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.2963 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the notice, dated 05.02.2009, issued by the second respondent, namely, the Deputy Commissioner, L.B.Nagar Circle, GHMC, purportedly under Section 402 r/w Section 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), which was issued consequent to the interim direction granted in W.P.No.5592 of 2007. The said writ petition came to be dismissed on the ground that on account of the failure of (a) the erstwhile Mansoorabad Grampanchayat; (b) the L.B.Nagar Municipality; and (c) now the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation in maintaining and retaining records relating to the approved layout or layouts pertaining to Rocktown Colony but whose legitimacy in the form of an approved layout is not established, no relief could be granted. The writ petitioner was served with the impugned notice alleging encroachment of open spaces earmarked for a park in an approved layout. The open spaces are purportedly earmarked in the layout of Dr.T.Srinivasulu and others in Survey Nos.66/11 and 66/12 Mansoorabad Village. As recorded in the judgment in W.P.No.5592 of 2007, the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation is itself not in a position to state with any certitude that there exists an approved layout, approved by the competent authority. The GHMC has confessed in the counter affidavit filed in W.P.No.5592 of 2007 that it is not in possession and custody of the original of the approved layout and has only a Xerox copy. As has been recorded in the said writ petition, the Commissioner of GHMC is also on record stating that the Corporation is not in a position to assert that there is an approved layout. The impugned notice dated 05.02.2009, admittedly, is a notice given in pursuance of the directions of this Court in W.P.No.5592 of 2007 dated 13.08.2007. Since the impugned notice is only a show cause notice calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the unauthorized structure constructed by him in the public open spaces should not be demolished/removed/pulled down, the petitioner shall submit his explanation to the same. Thereupon, the respondents shall consider the same with reference to the authentic records available and pass appropriate orders specifying whether the constructions made by the petitioner are authorized or are otherwise in areas earmarked for open spaces or parks in any approved layout. Till then, no coercive steps to demolish the constructions shall be made. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:14.07.2010 VGB