HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.3614 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner purchased the plot bearing No.3/Part admeasuring 94 square yards in Survey No.44/A situated near Mahindra Nagar, Quthbullapur village, Quthbullapur, Ranbgareddy District. She made an application to the 1st respondent seeking permission to construct a building. The 1st respondent accorded permission through permit dated 22.09.2009 pursuant to which the petitioner started construction in accordance with the sanctioned plan. The petitioner claims that, while the construction was half way through, employees of the 1st respondent came to the subject property on 29.01.2010, directed her to stop further construction and served a copy of the proceedings dated 29.01.2010 whereby she was informed that the building permission granted earlier was being kept in abeyance for want of production of valid documents regarding both her and her vendors valid title over the property. The petitioner was directed not to take up further construction. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition. The petitioner would submit that a copy of the show cause notice dated 10.12.2009 was not furnished to her and it is only subsequent to the proceedings dated 29.01.2010 was she able to procure a copy of the earlier show cause notice dated 10.12.2009 and had had filed her objections thereto. A perusal of the show cause notice would reveal that the Municipal Commissioner had called upon the petitioner to show cause why the permission granted to her earlier should not be cancelled/revoked as a complaint had been received from Sri K.M. Pandu that the petitioner or her alleged vendors Smt. Maddela Laxmamma and Sri Maddela Krishna had no manner of right or possession over the said land. Counter affidavits have been filed both by the 1st and 2nd respondents. The counter-affidavit filed by the 1st respondent does not disclose proof of service of the show cause notice. Be that as it may, the show cause notice dated 10.12.2009 merely requires the petitioner to show her title, and that of her vendors, over the property in question. It is not in dispute that the Municipal Commissioner has the power to prima facie examine the title of the applicant over the property in question before according permission for construction of a building. While the notice calls upon the petitioner to show cause why the permission should not be cancelled/revoked the impugned proceedings dated 29.01.2010 neither cancels nor revokes the permission but only keeps the permission granted earlier in abeyance till production of valid documents. Ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is permitted to submit an additional reply to the show cause notice enclosing thereto relevant documents including proof of her vendors title over the property in question. If such a reply, along with all the requisite documents including the documents aforementioned, is submitted within a period of two weeks from today, the 1st respondent shall consider the objections and take appropriate decision thereafter in accordance with law. In case the documents sought for are not submitted within the aforementioned period of two weeks, it is open to the 1st respondent to take action for cancellation/revocation of the permission granted earlier. Till then the 1st respondent shall not demolish the property in question. The petitioner shall also not make any further construction. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs. Date: 31.03.2010 ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J MRKR