IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18841 of 2008 Between: 1 Babulal Solanki, S/o. Late Laha Chand Solanki, R/o. 15-8-317, Feelkhana, Hyderabad. 2 Narmada Devi Solanki, W/o. Babula Solanki, R/o. 15-8-317, Feelkhana, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by Asst. City Planner, Circle-V, Sardar Mahal, Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector, Hyderabad District, at Nampally, Hyderabad. 4 The Tahsildar, Nampally Mandal, Hyderabad 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 will be pleased to pass an order or orders one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by directing the Respondent No.1 and 2 to grant and approve the building sanction permission for building construction in respect f the property bearing No.15-8-216 admeasuring 144 Square Yards and Property bearing No.15-8-217 admeasuring 85 Square Yards consisting of Ground and First Floor all situated at Begum Bazar., Hyderabad, without insisting for the NOC from the Respondents No.3 and declare the same as totally illegal, arbitrary against the principle of natural justice pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.SURESH SHIV SAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioners, who are two in number, assailing the action of the respondents in not receiving building permission application and insisting for production of No Objection Certiﬁcate from the District Collector. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri R. Radhakrishna Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, received notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. Learned counsel on either side agreed that the issue involved in this writ petition squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in G. Sudheer Kumar and others v. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and others W.P.No.3474 of 2006, dated 14.12.2006, wherein this Court made the following observations. “It is needless to say that in the light of the consistent view expressed by this Court that ‘no objection certiﬁcate’ from the revenue authorities cannot be insisted upon, the respondents are bound to consider the applications referred to supra in accordance with law. It is needless to say that the petitioners may have to comply with the other objections, if any, which may be raised.” In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage in terms of the above referred judgment, directing respondents 1 and 2 to receive the application of the petitioners in respect of the premises bearing No.15-8-217 situated at Begum Bazar, Hyderabad and consider the same without insisting for no objection certiﬁcate, in accordance with the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and the Rules made there under. _________________________ (B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.) 29th August, 2008 Note: C.C. in 3 days. (B/o) Js. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by Asst. City Planner, Circle-V, Sardar Mahal, Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector, Hyderabad District, at Nampally, Hyderabad. 4 The Tahsildar, Nampally Mandal, Hyderabad District. 5 2 CD copies.