THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.30009 OF 2011 Date: 15th November, 2011 Between: Ganta Kanthamma and another …..Petitioners AND The Nellore Municipal Corporation, SPSR Nellore District, Rep. by its Commissioner and another …..Respondents THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.30009 OF 2011 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to demolish the compound wall and house wall of the petitioners, building bearing door No.16/111/1073 (old), 16/111/1528 (new), situated at Haranathapuram Village, Nellore Town and District without following the due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard. 3. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of an extent of 58 ½ ankanams (468 square yards) of land and house, situated at Haranathapuram Village, Nellore Town and District and that out of 58 ½ ankanams, the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have purchased 24 ankanams each from their vendor Konduru Subbarayudu under two registered sale deeds both dated 5.2.1990 bearing Nos.630 and 631 respectively and the petitioners are in joint possession and enjoyment of the said house. It is further stated that on 29.11.2003, the respondents came to the petitioners’ house and gave marking on the walls to an extent of 7 feet stating that they have to surrender that extent of land to them and none of the respondents is issued notice for demolition and that the petitioners have filed Writ Petition No.25151 of 2003 before this Court and this Court in W.P.M.P.No.13699 of 2003, dated 1.12.2003, directed the respondents not to demolish the compound wall of the petitioners and that in that writ petition, the Commissioner, Nellore Municipality filed counter stating that he was not aware of the road widening, if any, taken up by the respondent No.2 therein and has not given any notice for demolition and that the respondent No.2 therein has not filed counter and that the counsel for the petitioners represented that in view of the stand taken by the respondent No.1, no further orders were necessary and in that view of the matter, the writ petition was closed. It is further submitted that on 17.10.2011, the respondent No.1 tried to demolish the compound wall and house wall of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the respondents are trying to demolish the compound wall and house wall of the petitioners without following the due process of law and, therefore, the petitioners pray to issue a direction to the respondents not to interfere with their house property. 5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 stated that the respondent No.1 did not issue any notice to the petitioners calling upon to demolish their building and it does not know about the issuance of notice by the respondent No.2 for that purpose. 6. From the material available on record, it is clear that as on today, no proceedings are initiated against the petitioner for acquisition of the land for the purpose of road widening. Therefore, the respondent No.2 cannot take the law into in his hands and demolish compound wall and house wall of the petitioners’ building for the purpose of road widening. Since the respondent No.1-Municipality is not aware of the road widening, the respondent No.2 is directed to follow due process of law, in case the said house, belonging to the petitioners, requires for road widening. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J 15th November, 2011 TJMR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.30009 OF 2011 Date: 15th November, 2011