IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 10906 of 2005 Between: Smt. G. Jaya Laxmi, W/o. G. Madhusudhan Rao, R/o. H.No. 17-2-87/40, Madannapet, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND Hyderabad urban Development authority, rep. by its Chairman, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to Issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondent in interfering with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in S.No.159 for an extent of 6.55 s1. mtrs at Block 4 Meerpet village, Saroornagar (M), R.R.District. is illegal, arbitrary and violative of ARt. 300 (A) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent not to interfere with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the above property. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. VENUGOPALA RAO PASNOORU Counsel for the Respondent : MR. M.DHANANJAY REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.10906 of 2005 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondent in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the property in Sy.No.159 to an extent of 665.55 sq. mts. at Block No.4, Meerpet Village, Saroornagar Mandal, R.R. District as arbitrary and illegal. This Court while directing Notice Before Admission, by order dated 03.05.2005 granted interim direction to the respondent not to lay the road through the land in possession of the petitioner without following the procedure prescribed under law. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent – Hyderabad Urban Development Authority. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations made by the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition in terms of the interim order dated 3.5.2005 making it clear that the respondent shall not interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the land in question in any manner whatsoever without following due process of law. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Dated: 29-01-2009 gbs