THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.26562 OF 2011 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.1 in not taking any action to restrain respondent No.2 from making illegal and unauthorized construction at T.S.No.3277, Lakshmivarapupet, Eluru, West Godavari District without leaving the necessary set backs and in violation of the approved plan, as illegal and arbitrary; and consequently, direct respondent No.1 to take necessary action to restrain respondent No.2 from making the illegal and unauthorized constructions in contravention of the Building Rules and approved plan and also to demolish the said constructions. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner and possessor of house property bearing D.No.17-4-8 situated in an extent of 127.9 Sq.yards at T.S.No.3277, Laxmivarapupet, Eluru. One Khasim Sharief, who is the maternal grand father of the petitioner, was the owner of the entire Madras Terraced roof house and the same was partitioned by his sons – Dawood Sharief and Akbar Sharief with equal shares. The southern portion fell to the share of Akbar Sharief, who in turn settled the said property in favour of Smt Shamla Begum under a registered settlement deed. She in turn executed a registered settlement deed in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the said house property. The entire house in a total extent of 254 ¾ sq.yards is having a common Madras Terraced roof and there is a common wall in between the two portions of the house. Respondent No.2, who is claiming right and title over the northern portion of the said house from Dawood Sharief and others, taking advantage of his absence, demolished northern portion of the house which has common roof and wall by causing damage to his southern portion of house and the common wall, started making construction of a double storied building without leaving necessary set backs as per the building regulations and also the rules in vogue. He made a complaint to the police and also filed a civil suit for the relief of damages caused by respondent No.2 and thereafter, he made several representations to respondent No.1 but no action has been initiated. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Respondent No.2 filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that he is making construction in accordance with the sanctioned plan, dated 02.07.2011, given by respondent No.1 Municipality and hence, the writ petition is not maintainable. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 contended that the officials of respondent No.1 Municipality would visit the premises in question and see whether the constructions are being made in accordance with the sanctioned plan or not and thereafter, appropriate action would be initiated if the constructions are contrary to the sanctioned plan after giving a reasonable opportunity to respondent No.2. 5. The factual matrix is not in dispute. According to the petitioner, respondent No.2 is making constructions in violation of the sanctioned plan and without leaving the set backs, as required under the Building Rules. On the other hand, it is the contention of respondent No.2 that he is making constructions completely in accordance with the sanctioned plan by the Municipality. Whether the constructions are being made according to the sanctioned plan or not has to be looked into by respondent No.1 or its officials. Therefore, respondent No.1 or its authorized officials shall visit the premises in question and see whether the building is constructed in accordance with the sanctioned plan or not and if there are any deviations, respondent No.1 Municipality shall issue a notice to respondent No.2 calling for his explanation with regard to deviations and after receiving objections, if any, from respondent No.2, appropriate decision has to be taken by respondent No.1 in accordance with law within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, respondent No.2 shall make constructions in accordance with the sanctioned plan and he shall not make any constructions contrary to the sanctioned plan. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ​ _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 03rd November, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.26562 OF 2011 Date:03.11.2011 AMD