HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19812 OF 2008 Date : 29.12.2009 Between: B.Nagasayana Reddy. …… Petitioner And Anantapur Municipal Corporation, Anantapur, rep. by its Commissioner & others. …..Respondents. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19812 OF 2008 ORDER: In view of the request made by the learned counsel for petitioner, as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-Municipal Corporation, and also the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks for directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the construction permission granted by the 1st respondent-Municipal Corporation in favour of 2nd respondent for making constructions in the premises bearing Door No.28/5/355, MIG 239 of A.P.Housing Board Colony, Anantapur, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.2, having obtained permission for construction of a residential house in ground plus two floors, has constructed ground plus four floors, in deviation to the sanctioned plan, and transferred it in favour of respondent No.3. Pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, dated 11.09.2008, after making inspection of the premises in question, a report prepared by the Commissioner of Anantapur Municipal Corporation, is placed before this Court. In the said report, it is stated that permission was granted for construction of only ground plus two floors, but however, respondents 2 and 3 have constructed ground plus four floors, in deviation to the approved plan. It is further stated that respondents 2 and 3 have made an application under the Building Penalisation Scheme, vide application No.94/2008/G2, dated 27th March 2008, by paying penal charges of Rs.20,000/-, and the same is pending consideration. 4. The Building Penalisation Scheme is notified by the Government pursuant to the amendments made to the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, by insertion of provision under Section 455-A of the said Act. The scheme of such penalization was the subject matter of challenge before this Court earlier, and a Division Bench of this Court, in the case of K.H.V.Prasad V. Government of A.P.[1], has already upheld the said scheme. As much as it is stated that the application submitted by respondents 2 and 3 under the Building Penalisation Scheme is pending consideration under Application No.94/2008/G2, dated 27th March 2008, no positive direction can be granted by this Court, at this stage, for removal of the constructions made in deviation to the sanctioned plan. As admittedly the permission granted in favour of respondent No.2 is only for construction of ground plus two floors, but constructions are made in deviation to the sanctioned plan, and taking into account the pendency of the application filed by respondents 2 and 3 in Application No.94/2008/G2, dated 27th March 2008, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to put-forth his objections before the authority under the Building Penalisation Scheme, within a period of four weeks from today. If any such objections are filed within the time stipulated, the competent authority under the Building Penalisation Scheme, shall consider such objections, before passing orders on the application of respondents 2 and 3. It is made clear that the 1st respondent-Municipal Corporation is at liberty to take appropriate steps in the matter, subject to the orders to be passed by the authority under the Building Penalisation Scheme on the application of respondents 2 and 3. 5. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 29th December 2009 ajr [1] 2009 (4) ALD 803 (DB)