HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W. P. No. 7306 of 2009 DATED: 02.11.2009 Between: M/s. Brilliant Grammar Educational Society .. Petitioner and 1. The District Collector 2. The District Panchayat Officer 3. The Divisional Panchayat Officer 4. The Panchayat Secretary .. Respondents O R D E R:- The petitioner-Brilliant Grammar School Educational Society states that it has purchased a piece of land in Sy. No. 41 situated at Abdullahpur village, Hayathnagar Mandal in the year 2007 for the purpose of construction of a school. The petitioner applied for permission for construction of school building with four Blocks i.e. I, II, III and IV, (each Block consisting of Ground + 2 floors). The Secretary, Gram Panchayat, vide orders passed in File No.GPA/15, 16, 17, & 18/2007, dated 03.09.2007, granted permission. Accordingly, as per the sanctioned plan, the petitioner constructed a school in the premises in question. Now, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the 1st respondent without issuing any show notice, directly issued proceedings dated 12.02.2009 directing the Panchayat Secretary, to demolish the school building on the ground that the petitioner constructed the building with G+3 Floors in the land in an extent of Acs. 31.14 gts. in Sy. Nos.41, 47 to 51. In pursuance of the said proceedings, the petitioner states that the 4th respondent issued Notice dated 18.03.2009 directing the petitioner to show cause as to why the building in question should not be demolished. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking to quash the impugned proceedings and the impugned notice. This Court, on 07.04.2009, while granting interim stay of the proceedings dated 12.02.2009, directed the 1st respondent-District Collector to appear before this Court and explain as to under what provision of law, he issued the impugned proceedings directing demolition of the building constructed by the petitioner. Later, the 1st respondent issued proceedings dated 22.04.2009 withdrawing the earlier proceedings dated 12.02.2009 issued by him. Thereafter, this Court directed the 1st respondent to file a detailed counter affidavit explaining the reasons for withdrawing the impugned Memo of demolition, dated 12.2.2009. In pursuance of the orders of this Court, the 1st respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit inter alia stating that the reason for withdrawing the Memo dated 12.02.2009 is that before the said memo was issued, the petitioner was not served with any notice. He further contended that as contemplated under Rule 31 of A.P. Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and Building) Rules, 2002, the applicant is required to obtain permission from the competent Technical Authority i.e. DTCP/HUDA/HADA invariably. As the petitioner constructed the school with G+2 floors for commercial purpose, without obtaining prior permission/clearance from the competent Technical authority, he directed the 2nd respondent-District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District to take necessary action, for demolition of the illegal and unauthorized buildings constructed by the petitioner, by following the due procedure under A.P. Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout & Building) Rules, 2002, issued in G.O. Ms. No. 67 PR & RD, dated 26.02.2002. It is further contended that the 4th respondent-Panchayat Secretary, who issued permission to the petitioner for construction of the building in question, vide his proceedings dated 03.09.2007, is not a competent authority, and therefore, the 1st respondent directed the 2nd respondent to take necessary action for demolition of illegal and unauthorized constructions made by the petitioner by following the procedure under A.P.G.O. Land Development (Layout & Building) Rules, 2002, issued in G.O. Ms. No. 67 PR & RD, dated 26.02.2002 and report compliance. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned Standing Counsel for Panchayat Raj appearing for the 4th respondent and perused the material placed on record. Admittedly, the 1st respondent before issuing the proceedings dated 12.02.2009 directing the 4th respondent to demolish the building in question, alleged to have been constructed by the petitioner without permission from the competent authority, has not issued any show cause notice to the petitioner. Without issuing any notice to the petitioner, the 1st respondent directed the 4th respondent, namely the Panchayat Secretary to demolish the illegal buildings constructed by the petitioners and appointed the 2nd respondent as supervisory officers to implement the said order and report compliance. Thereafter, when this Court questioned the power of the 1st respondent to issue such proceedings, the 1st respondent issued Memo dated 22.04.2009 withdrawing the impugned proceedings dated 12.02.2009 on the ground that the same were issued without issuing any notice to the petitioner. Since the 1st respondent issued memo, dated 22.04.2009 withdrawing the impugned proceedings dated 12.02.2009, no further orders need be passed in the writ petition, and the same is accordingly closed. However, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are at liberty to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner indicating the violations of the Rules or bye-laws, if any, made by the petitioner, in constructing the buildings in question and after considering the explanation, if any, that may be submitted by the petitioner to such notice, pass appropriate orders and then take necessary action in accordance with such orders to be passed. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 2nd November, 2009 bcj