THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.30342 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in attempting to demolish the petitioner’s house bearing Door No.10-3-7/1 in an extent of 156 square yards in Plot No.11 situated in Survey No.34 corresponding to Old Survey No.22/7 of Gajuwaka with assessment No.101761, in spite of her building application, which is not considered on the premise that it is under the purview of Legislative House Committee, and without issuing notices in accordance with law and without giving an opportunity of being heard, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish the house of the petitioner in any manner whatsoever. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner purchased the property in question under a registered sale deed dated 30.11.2000 and since then, she has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. With a view to replace the roofing with R.C.C, she made an application to the respondent- Corporation seeking approval of building plan, by paying an amount of Rs.10,180/- on 10.06.2010. The said application is pending consideration on the premise that the entire Gajuwaka area is already under the purview of a House Committee of State Legislature since there is a long pending litigation between the Government and the erstwhile Estate holder. Even though there are thousands of houses without approval, the respondents are not initiating any steps against such constructions. The grievance of the petitioner is that on 11.11.2011, the officials of the respondent-Corporation came to her house and tried to demolish the house. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner purchased the property in question under registered sale deed and the respondents are trying to demolish her house without issuing any notice as required under law, and hence, he prays to issue a direction to the respondents not to demolish the house of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents contended that the petitioner has constructed the house without obtaining prior sanction from the respondent authorities and that appropriate action will be initiated against her in accordance with law. 5. The case of the petitioner is that she is the owner of the premises in question having purchased the same under a registered sale deed and that the respondents are trying to demolish her house, without issuing any notice, whereas it is the contention of the respondents that the petitioner made the construction without obtaining sanctioned plan from the respondent Corporation. The petitioner is not supposed to construct the house without therebeing any sanctioned plan, but that does not mean that the respondents can demolish the same, without giving any opportunity to the petitioner. 6. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Corporation to initiate an action against the petitioner in accordance with law, if she has constructed the house in question without obtaining sanctioned plan. There shall be no order as to costs. K.C. BHANU, J Date: 20.12.2011 Note: Furnish CC in two days B/o. va