IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 364 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 11/07/2007 in WP NO : 14188 OF 2002 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Bethal Gospal Church Rep by its Pastor S.Prabhu Prasad S/o S.M.Narasaimha, R/o Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Principal Secretary (Municipal Asministration) Secretary Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Vice-Chairman and Managing Director of H.U.D.A. Rep by its Chairman, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 4 Deputy Zonal Manager-AP9.9.02, Quthbuullapur Industrial Area Local Authority, Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad-55. 5 The Zonal Manager & Commissioner, A.P.I.I.C., Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District. 6 The Mandal Revenue Officer, I.D.A., Quthbuullapur Mandal, Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad-55. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.SATISH DESHPANDEY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 364 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: (PER BPR,J) The appellant herein is a church and unsuccessful writ petitioner who filed this appeal questioning the orders passed in W.P.No. 14188 of 2002 dated 11.7.2007 dismissing the writ petition by the learned single judge. At the request of Sri P.V.Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned Government Pleader for Municipalities appearing for first respondent, the main appeal is taken up for disposal. The appellant herein has filed writ petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inter-alia seeking mandamus for direction not to demolish the church in terms of the notice issued by the 4th respondent dated 24.5.2002 in respect of premises in plot No.57 covered by survey Nos. 279 and 280 (part) in Phase-I, Industrial Development Area, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad , pending conversion application filed by the appellant/petitioner. The contention of the petitioner is that though he has made an application on 6.6.2002 and the same remained unconsidered by the respondents and in spite of the same, respondents issued a notice, hence the writ petition was filed. After contest by the respondents, though no counter affidavit is filed before the learned Single Judge, the writ petition was dismissed mainly on the ground that admittedly the petitioner’s activity is one without any prior permission as required under the provisions of law, which includes change of land use. Hence, this appeal. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material, we advised the learned Government Pleader to file a counter as to whether any such application is filed on 6.6.2002 for change of land use. In response to the same, the respondents filed a counter affidavit, not exactly denying the very filing of such an application, however, stating that they are not able to trace the same. There cannot be any dispute in regard to the proposition of law that without prior permission as required under the law, the appellant can make any constructions. However, taking into consideration the fact that the appellant has already filed an application dated 6.6.2002, which bears the acknowledgment of the respondents but not traceable, we deem it appropriate that the appellant be permitted to file copy of application dated 6.6.2002 afresh within a period of two weeks from today to the third respondent herein. On receipt of the same, the third respondent is directed to consider and disposed of the same within a period of six weeks thereafter after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. It is needless to mention that till the disposal of such application, the respondents, including 4th respondent shall not take any action for demolition of the existing structure. Accordingly the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. _________________ B.PRAKASH RAO,J ________________ R KANTHA RAO,J DATE: 23.6.2008 TVK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 364 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: (PER BPR,J) DATE: 23.6.2008