THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.33542 of 2011 ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring order No.3743/TP/CX/GHMC/2011, dated 17.12.2011 issued by the respondent directing the petitioner to vacate Flat Nos. OA and OB, Lacasa Apartment, Road No.11, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad within 24 hours as illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, may be stated as follows: Petitioner purchased two flats in ground floor bearing Nos. OA & OB in Lacasa Apartments, Road No.11, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, under a registered sale deed vide document Nos.3878 and 3879 of 2008, and the said apartment was constructed in accordance with the plan granted vide permit No.345/67 in file No.137/TP5/91, dated 29.10.1991. The petitioner is running a medical transcription company under the name and style of “M/s.Mediland Transtech Pvt Ltd”, in his owned flats. His flats were counted for commercial category and the property tax was levied on the same basis, which he paid to the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. He does not have any business counter at the premises and he is doing every correspondence over Internet and computers only. But, the respondent issued the impugned show-cause notice dated 05.12.2011 as to why the building should not be closed. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 12.12.2011. Without giving any opportunity of being heard, the respondent passed the impugned order directing the petitioner to vacate the premises. The petitioner is not carrying on any commercial activity as mentioned in the impugned order. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner’s flats were counted for commercial category and property tax was levied on the same; that he is not having any business counter at the premises and he is not disturbing the residential atmosphere and that Section 461A of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) has no application to the facts of the present case, and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 5. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent contended that permission to the premises in question was granted for residential purpose, but the petitioner is using the same for the purpose other than residential purpose and hence, the impugned order was rightly passed on a complaint received, and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 6. Section 461A of the Act reads thus: “Powers to seal unauthorised construction/development of premises: (1) It shall be lawful for the Commissioner, at any time, before or after making an order for the removal or discontinuance of any unauthorized development or construction under Section 461, to make an order directing the sealing of such development or property or taking the assistance of police, for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the Act. (2) Where any development or property has been sealed, the Commissioner, may, for the purpose of removing or discontinuing such development or property, order such seal to be removed. …” 7. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Section 461A of the Act has no application to the facts of the present case because it is not a case of erection or re-erection of the building without there being any sanctioned plan. Admittedly, there is a sanctioned plan for the building in question. But, quoting a wrong provision of law cannot be a ground to set aside the impugned notice. The cause of action for issuance of the impugned notice is traceable to Sections 441 and 596 of the Act because the petitioner is using the premises for the purpose other than for which permission was granted. Therefore, the impugned notice can be treated as a notice under Sections 441 and 596 of the Act. 8. The impugned order No.3743/TP/CX/GHMC/2011, dated 17.12.2011 issued by the respondent be treated as a notice under Sections 441 and 596 of the Act, for which the petitioner shall submit his explanation within a period of ten days from today. Thereafter, the respondent shall take appropriate decision in the matter in accordance with law on the explanation that may be submitted by the petitioner. Till then, the building in question i.e., Flat Nos. OA and OB, Lacasa Apartments, Road No.11, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, shall not be sealed. 9. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU,J Dated: 20.12.2011 va