IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.31280 OF 2011 Between : Eqtedar Mehdi Khan ... PETITIONER A N D Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and another. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.31280 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not issuing the certificate for conversion of the building of the petitioner under house bearing municipal No.3-5-880 (Old No.1014/A) total admeasuring 450 sq.yards situated at Vittalwadi Extension, opposite MLA Quarters, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad from residential use to commercial use as per Clause 5(6) of G.O.Ms.No.901, MA& UD (M), dated 31.12.2007, without influence of the letter No.13298/BPS/C9/CZ/GHMC/2008, dated 18.08.2011 issued by respondent No.2, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to submit the sanctioned plan vide permit No.154/98, dated 21.06.2008 for the purpose of conversion of the building from residential use to commercial use in respect of the building of the petitioner. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition it is stated that the petitioner is the lawful owner and possessor of land house bearing No.3-5-880 (Old No.1014/A) consisting of ground and first floor, total admeasuring 450 square yards, situated at Vittalwadi Extension, opposite MLA Quarters, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad, having obtained the said land through gift. As it was in a dilapidated condition, the petitioner applied for construction of a residential building for stilt + 4 upper floors. Thereafter the respondent Corporation granted permission vide Permit No.154/98, dated 21.0.2008 and accordingly, the petitioner constructed the building in accordance with sanctioned plan and Building bye-laws. Subsequently, in the year 2008, the petitioner approached the office of the respondents for sanction of approval for conversion of subject land from residential to commercial land and made an application in a prescribed form along with all relevant documents along with fee. Thereafter, the officials of the respondents verified the physical structures after measurements, demanded the petitioner payment of penalty/penal charges under Clause 5 (6) of the G.O. and accordingly, the petitioner paid an amount of Rs.19,16,012/- through demand draft, dated 13.11.2010, which was received by the respondents on the same day and issued approval for conversion of the subject property from residential use to commercial use. The respondents also collected taxes for commercial use from the petitioner, on one hand, the respondents collecting the property tax for commercial use from the petitioner and they have not issued conversion certificate. All of sudden, the officials of respondent No.2 Corporation visited the subject property and tried to demolish the same. The petitioner informed to the respondents that he applied for regularization under BPS Scheme and the same is pending consideration. But the officials informed the petitioner that the said application had already been refused on 18.08.2011 and the same was communicated to him through registered post. As a matter of fact, the petitioner did not receive any information with regard to refusal of BPS application, since he was out of Country and returned back only in the last month. Even though the application of the petitioner under BPS schedule was refused, the authorities have no right to take any steps for demolition in view of the fact that the petitioner constructed the building for residential use in accordance with the sanctioned plan and never violated any deviations or constructed the building contrary to the sanctioned plan. Therefore, the action of the respondents in straightway attempting to demolish the building is highly illegal. With great difficulty the petitioner got the order of refusal of BPS Application, dated 18.08.2011 from respondent No.2, wherein it was mentioned that the BPS application is refused on the ground of not submitting the building permission vide Permit No.154/98, dated 21.06.2008. But, as a matter of fact, the petitioner had already submitted the building permit along with the application, which was obtained long back in the year, 2008, much prior to making of BPS application. The petitioner is also now ready once again to submit the building permission vide permit No.154/98, dated 21.06.2008 before respondent No.2 for sanction of conversion of subject building from residential use to commercial use. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the Municipal Corporation. 4. The scheme framed by the Government in the G.O. referred to above, not only provides for regularization of unauthorized structures, but also the remedy of appeal, in case of rejection. An appellate authority is said to have been constituted. The petitioner can avail that remedy. 5. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order, dated 18.08.2011 within a period of two weeks from today. The respondents shall not proceed to remove the structures in question till the appeal is disposed of. After filing of the appeal, the respondents shall dispose of the same with accordance with law particularly with reference to the Zonal Regulations. It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to prefer the appeal within two weeks from day, it shall be open to the respondents to take further steps. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU, J DECEMBER 19, 2011. YVL Note: Issue C.C. today. (B/o) YVL THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.31280 OF 2011 19.12.2011 YVL