THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.24539 OF 2011 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in not considering and taking action on the representation, dated 30.06.2011, of the petitioner under Sections 456 and 459 of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’), as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, direct respondent Nos.1 to 3 to consider and take necessary action on the said representation. 2. Petitioner is the absolute owner of entire first floor of the building consisting of ground and first floor in premises No.2-1-32 (New Nos.2-1- 32 to 2-1-35) along with undivided share of 91 square yards out of 182 square yards situated at Dhan Bazar, Tobacco Bazar, Secunderabad having purchased the same under registered sale deed, dated 16.05.1997. Respondent Nos.4 to 6 are the owners of three shops situated in the ground floor of the said building and doing business therein. The building was constructed with lime stone with brick walls and aged more than hundred years. The roof of the building is very much damaged and rain water from the top of building is leaking to the ground floor. The walls also became very weak and shaking when the vehicles are passing on the road and became unsafe to withstand. In the year 2005, major portion of roof peeled down due to seepage of rain water and so also the roof of the ground floor. As such, the petitioner vacated the premises and requested respondent Nos.4 to 6 to vacate their shops so that they can construct a new building. Respondent Nos.4 to 6 agreed to vacate the shops by looking for alternative premises. Under the guise of searching for alternative premises, respondent Nos.4 to 6 are postponing the issue and as such, the petitioner lodged a representation before respondent Nos.1 to 3 requesting them to inspect the premises and take necessary steps to demolish the dilapidated structure. The Town Planning officials visited the premises and found that it is unsuitable for habitation and opined that it may collapse at any moment. Respondent Nos.4 to 6 represented to the authorities that they are looking for suitable alternative premises to shift the business and promised that they themselves would vacate and remove the dilapidated structures but no action has been initiated. Due to constant fear of collapse, respondent Nos.4 to 6 are not allowing the representatives of petitioner even to climb to the first floor. As no action has been taken by respondent Nos.1 to 3, the present writ petition is filed. 3. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that the Corporation issued notice under Section 459 of the Act to respondent Nos.4 to 6 on 17.08.2010 and since there was no response from them, the Corporation issued notice under Section 456 of the Act on 17.09.2010, but as respondent Nos.4 to 6 refused to acknowledge the same, the said notices were affixed on the wall of the building in question. Respondent Nos.4 to 6 orally informed the staff of the Corporation that the ground floor is in good condition and as such, there is no need to demolish the ground floor. The file was forwarded to the Engineering Section for opinion regarding the structural stability of the premises in question and basing on the same, the Executive Engineer, Division – XI inspected the said premises and reported that the premises is in a dilapidated condition. After receiving the written opinion/report from the Engineering Section, the Corporation will initiate further action as per Sections 459 and 456 of the Act. In response to the representations submitted by the petitioner, the Corporation has already initiated action in respect of the said premises and hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Respondent No.4 filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that the petitioner, with a mala fide intention to sell the portions of the house property so as to make a commercial complex by amalgamating the properties, is harassing them, and that the schedule property is not in a dilapidated condition and not liable to be dismantled and hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 6. 6. Admittedly, respondent Nos.4 to 6 orally informed the staff of the Corporation that the ground floor is in good condition. It is not in dispute that respondent Nos.4 to 6 are in occupation of the ground floor whereas the petitioner is residing in the first floor. The Corporation issued a notice under Section 456 of the Act but respondent Nos.4 to 6 refused to acknowledge the same. However, the entire file was submitted to the Engineering Section of the Municipal Corporation for giving opinion regarding the structural stability of the premises in question and basing on the same, the Executive Engineer, Division-XI inspected the said premises and reported that the premises is in a dilapidated condition. The written opinion/report from the Engineering Section has been sent to the Municipal Corporation authorities so as to take further action. Therefore, when the Municipal Corporation is acting in accordance with law, the writ petition can be disposed of directing respondent Nos.1 to 3 to take appropriate action after the report is submitted and after giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner as well as respondent Nos.4 to 6. The concerned Engineer shall give a detailed report with regard to structural stability of subject building to respondent No.1 within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. 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.24539 OF 2011 Date:03.11.2011 AMD