IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 17873 of 2001 Between: Smt. Somisetty Mohini Lakshmi Durga Seetha Masthanamma, W/o. Srinivasulu, Hindu Female, House Wife, R/o. D.No.6D-6-27, Southern Street, Eluru, West Godavari District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Eluru Municipality, Eluru. 2 The District Collector, Eluru, West Godavari District. ...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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action contemplated by the Respondents to demolish the building of the Petitioner situated in land admeasuring 46-6 Sq.Yds, of site in T.S.No.799/1 of Eluru Town with shop therein having Door No.7A-9-23 is illegal, arbitrary, erroneous, unconstitutional and also violative of the Procedure prescribed by this Hon'ble Court and consequently to direct the Respondents not to demolish the building bearing Door. No. 7A-9-23, situated in 46-6 Sq. Yds, of site in T.S.No.799/1 of Main Bazaar, Eluru. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Y.V.RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.S. NAGESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner submits that she obtained the property of 46.6 sq. yards in T.S.No.799/1 of Eluru Town with shop therein bearing Door No.7A-9-23 through a will dated 29.06.1981. While so, the first respondent sought to demolish the said shop for the purpose of widening of the road. 2. This Court while issuing notice before admission on 27.08.2001 directed the respondents not to demolish the building bearing D.No.7A-9-23 situated over an extent of 46.6 sq. yards of site in T.S.No.799/1 of Main Bazaar, Eluru or any portion thereof. If any building or the land of the petitioner is required for widening of the road, it is always open to the respondents to acquire the same by way of private negotiations or by initiating the land acquisition proceedings but without following due process of law the property of the petitioner cannot be taken away or demolished. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed not to demolish the building of the petitioner without following due process of law. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 3, 2008 DSK