THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL No.1799 of 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) With the consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the appeal itself is taken up for disposal, at the interlocutory stage, in view of the limited question involved in this writ appeal. 2. The writ appeal is directed against the interim order, dated 28.08.2008, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in disposing of W.P.M.P.No.14120 of 2008 in W.P.No.10823 of 2008, which was filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to demolish the building in premises bearing No.8-2-656/K/6, totally admeasuring 474.8 square yards, situate at Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, without following the procedure under law, pending disposal of the said writ petition. 3. Appellants are the writ petitioners and respondents are the respondents in the said writ petition. 4. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment, the parties will be referred to as arrayed in the said writ petition. 5. The whole question that is involved in this writ appeal is as to whether all the directions that were given by the learned single Judge while disposing of the said W.P.M.P., pending disposal of the said writ petition, be complied with by the writ petitioners or not. 6. The directions given by the learned single Judge in the impugned order reads as under: “In that view of the matter, the petitioners are permitted to carry out internal works in the first and second floors alone. They shall not attend to any work in the third floor or on the terrace eight pillars raised on the south east corner up to 10 feet for fixing and maintenance of the lift as well as for the stair case. Similarly, the petitioner shall not carry out any constructions on the north west corner four pillars raised up to the height of 11 feet for the construction of the water tank.” 7. Now, it is the grievance of the writ petitioners that though the learned single Judge permitted them to carry out the internal works in the first and second floors, however, windows are not fixed to the third floor, in which the writ petitioners were forbidden to carry out the works, as such, the same would cause damage to the building. Therefore, they seek permission of this Court to modify the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge. They further represent that the area, where the four pillars are constructed for erection of the lift, was also to be covered temporarily, otherwise, the lift, even if erected, cannot be put to use. Therefore, in order to avert such kind of damage in future, they require permission of this Court, again, to make some arrangements to cover the said four pillars. 8. Accordingly, having regard to the facts and circumstances, we feel it appropriate to permit the writ petitioners to fix glass panels to the windows in the third floor in order to prevent the seepage of water or any other damage that is likely to be caused to the third floor. Except this, for any other purpose, the third floor shall not be put to use. 9. It is further clarified that there shall not be any encumbrance created in favour of third parties by the writ petitioners insofar as the third floor is concerned and the third floor shall not be put to use in any other manner than directed by the learned single Judge in the impugned order, pending disposal of the said writ petition. 10. Further, the writ petitioners are permitted to cover the four pillars which are meant for erection of the lift, by putting any temporary shelter on it, to protect the same from any damage in future. 11. The above two facilities that are provided by this Court are subject to the outcome of the final hearing of the said writ petition. 12. With the above observations and directions, the writ appeal is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH 26th December 2008 dr