IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13886 of 2008 Between: J. Chandraiah S/o. Yemulaiah R/o. Plot No.137, Shantinagar Harijan Colony, Uppal, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep. by its Commissioner & Special Officer, Tank bund Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner, Circle-2, Uppal, East Zone, GHMC., Hyderabad. 3 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 4 The District Social Welfare Officer (L.A.), Social Welfare Department, Government of A.P., Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 herein, in contemplating to demolish the house of the petitioner and evict the petitioner from the property bearing Plot No.137, in Sy.No.680, covered by Shantinagar Harijan Colony, Uppal Kalan Village, Hayatnagar Mandal, presently within the jurisdiction of the Respondents 1 and 2 herein, without following due process of law, as arbitrary and illegal. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CH. RAMASEKHARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.R. RAMACHANDRA REDDY The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13886 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by Mr. J. Chandraiah, assailing the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in making attempts to demolish the constructions made by him, without putting him on notice. When this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that there is no contemplation of demolition of structures put up by the petitioner and even if they are required to be demolished, the respondents will follow due process of law in carrying out the same. Recording the said submission of the learned Standing Counsel, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to follow due process of law in the event the constructions made by the petitioner are required to be demolished. No order as to costs. ________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J 1st July, 2008. IBL