IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO.28193 of 2008 Between: V.Seshagiri Rao S/o.late Pattabhi Ramaiah, R/o.H.No.9-36-8A, Plot No.87, Pitapuram Colony, Visakhapatnam. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam. 2 The City Planner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam. 3 M/s. Darshan Associates, A Partnership firm, represented by its Partner Ashok Kumar Jain, S/o. Mulchand Jain R/o. Darshan Towers, Beside Shiva Rama Sweets, Main Road, Visakhapatnam -1. 4 Smt.S.Krishnaveni, R/o.Plot No.86, MIG, Pitapuram Colony, Visakhapatnam. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ, Order or direction one particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondent No.1 and 2 in not taking any action against the Respondents No.3 and 4 for making construction of high rise building consisting of Ground + four floors in Plot No.86 MIG, G.No.9-36-8/1 in Survey No.46 of Pitapuram Colony, Visakhapatnam without leaving set backs as per G.O.Ms.No.678, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department dated 7.9.2007 and to direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to take suitable action against Respondents No.3 and 4 to make construction by leaving proper set backs and to demolish such portion of building in Plot No.86 MIG, G.No.9-36-8/1 in Survey No.46 of Pitapuram Colony, Visakhapatnam which offends the set backs as mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.678, Municipal Administration and Urban Development dated 7.9.2007 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.SOMESWARA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: (SC FOR VUDA) MR.N.RANGA REDDY The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO.28193 of 2008 ORDER: According to the petitioner, he built a house in plot No.87, MIG in Pitapuram Colony, Visakhapatnam and the unofficial respondent i.e. the fourth respondent is the owner of the plot adjoining the house of the petitioner. Initially, a small house was constructed in the said plot belonging to the fourth respondent and the Corporation also gave door number as 9-36-8/A. It appears that the fourth respondent gave the entire extent to the third respondent for development of the said plot into ground floor plus four floors residential building. The third respondent started constructing the house and coming to know that the said constructions is contrary to the Building Regulations such as not leaving 2 meters set back etc., the petitioner brought it to the notice of the first respondent by personally meeting him and giving a representation dated 31.10.2008. As no action has been initiated, he sent the said representation again by registered post on 10.11.2008 and 26.11.2008. Despite the fact that the first respondent acknowledged the said representations, no action has been initiated and hence, the petitioner approached this Court and filed the present Writ Petition. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned Standing counsel for VUDA, this Court is of the view to dispose of the Writ Petition at the admission stage in the following manner, by dispensing with the notice to respondents 3 and 4. The first respondent is hereby directed to consider the said representations dated 31.10.2008, 10.11.2008 and 26.11.2008 and hold a detailed enquiry and come to the conclusion as to whether the said construction made by the third respondent is as per the approved building plan or not. Now that this Court is dispensing with the usual notice to the unofficial respondents, the first respondent is hereby directed to put respondents 3 and 4 on notice, hear them and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. As it is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the third respondent is proceeding with the construction in the land in question, the fourth respondent is hereby directed to stop construction till such enquiry by the first respondent is completed. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four {4} weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage. _________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 26th December 2008 RRB