THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32475 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent in issuing proceedings bearing Notice No.13/2011/G2, dated 26.11.2011, under Sections 452 (1) & (2) and 461 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently, direct the respondent not to demolish the existing constructions made by the petitioners in Door No.18-1-280 in Survey No. 463 situated at Bhavani Nagar, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 2. The petitioners purchased an extent of 213 Square Yards of land bearing Door No.18-1-280 in Survey No.463 situated at Bhavani Nagar, Tirupati under a registered sale deed dated 29.07.2010. Thereafter, on the application made by the petitioners seeking permission to construct two-floor building for residential purpose, the respondent corporation granted permission vide proceedings dated 16.09.2010. While the matters stood thus, impugned proceedings were issued by the respondent directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorized constructions pointed out in the said notice within 7 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The petitioners submitted an explanation on 01.12.2011 to the respondent explaining the circumstances under which some constructions were made contrary to the sanction plan. But, till date no action has been taken. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 26.11.2011, the petitioners gave explanation on 01.12.2011, but no action has been taken till now; that therefore, the petitioners are also taking steps to make an application under B.R.S.; and hence, he prays to issue a direction to the respondent not to demolish the building in question. 4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel for the respondent contended that the petitioners constructed cellar, second, third and fourth floors without obtaining any sanction from the Municipality; that there are certain deviations from the sanction plan in making the constructions and that therefore, appropriate decision has to be taken in pursuance of the impugned notice along with the explanation submitted by the petitioners and hence, he prays to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. The allegation is that the petitioners have not obtained permission for construction of cellar, second, third and fourth floors on the subject land. Since there are some deviations from the sanction plan, the impugned notice was issued. In pursuance of the said notice, the petitioners seem to have given an explanation on 01.12.2011, within the time prescribed. Therefore, appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondent – Municipality in accordance with law in the matter duly considering the explanation submitted by the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to pass appropriate orders on the impugned notice duly considering the explanation of the petitioners, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till a decision is taken and an order is passed, the building in question of the petitioners shall not be demolished. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J December 12, 2011 Note: Issue wire at party’s cost. B/o. MD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32475 OF 2011 December 12, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Dated: 12.12.2011 PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32475 OF 2011 Between: S. Madhusudhan Rao and another ..... PETITIONERS AND The Tirupati Municipal Corporation ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: