IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16551 of 2008 Between: Padmanabham Madan Kumar, S/o. Late Rama Rao, R/o. Allaka Veedhi, Vizianagaram. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Vizianagaram Municipality, Vizianagaram Rep by its Commissioner, 2 The Executive Engineer (R & B), Vizianagaram. .....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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents herein in proposing to demolish the building of the petitioner at D.No.11-1-25 to 34 , Putchala Street, Vizianagaram without initiating the proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act or following the procedure under Section 174 of the A.P.Municipalities Act as illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.A.JAGANNATHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.S.NAGESWARA REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition has been ﬁled by Padmanabham Madan Kumar assailing the action of the respondents in contemplating to demolish the building bearing Door No.11-1-25 to 34 without following due process of law. 2. Petitioner is in occupation of the building bearing Door No.11-1-25 to 34. His father purchased vacant site in 11th ward, Kothapeta North Ward, Puchhala Veedhi, South Road, T.S.No.67, Vizianagaram, and constructed shop rooms in the ground ﬂoor. The Vizianagaram Municipality assessed the shops for tax vide assessment No.16027 (Old assessment No.3516-A). The property came to be re-assessed under re- assessment No.109302039. His father died on 14-04- 1995. After the death of his father, the property devolved on him and thereby he became the absolute owner. The Vizianagaram Municipality, Vizianagaram, represented by its Commissioner/1st respondent is contemplating to demolish the premises bearing Door No.11-1-25 to 34 without putting him on notice. Hence, the writ Petition. 3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission, the learned standing counsel appearing for Vizianagaram Municipality received notices on behalf of the respondents and reports that the respondent would follow the due process of law in the event of the house bearing No11-1-25 to 34 is required to be demolished. 4. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to follow due process of law in the event of the house owned by the petitioner is required to be demolished. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J 31st July, 2008 Tsy To 1 The Commissioner, Vizianagaram Municipality, Vizianagaram. 2 The Executive Engineer (R & B), Vizianagaram. 3 2CCs to the 4 2CD copies