IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 3648 of 2009 Between: Smt. N. Laxmi Devi W/o. N.S. Rajeshwar Rao R/o. H.No. 15-8-474, Feel Khana, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep. by The Commissioner & Special Officer, Lower Tank Bund, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT 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 by calling for the records relating to and connected with Proceedings No. 459/ACP/CV/GHMC/2009, dated 28-01-2009/17-02-2009 holding it absolutely illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and direct the respondent not to interfere or undertake demolition of premises bearing Municipal No. 15-8-474 & 459, situated at Feelkhana, Hyderabad in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.PRATAP NARAYAN SANGHI Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by an order passed by the respondent Municipality under Section 456 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’) directing her to demolish the building within a period of seven days in the interest of public and to avoid any danger to the lives of inmates of the road and surrounding existing buildings and passersby. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent Corporation and perused the material made available on record. The case of the petitioner is that she is residing in the property bearing Municipal No.15-8-474 admeasuring 65 square yards and her brother is residing in the house bearing Door No.15-8-459. While so, without any notice to her, her brother filed a suit for partition on the file of the IX Additional Chief Judge-cum-Fast Track Court, City Civil Court, Hydearbad and obtained a preliminary decree. Based on the said decree, he has also sold away the property to third parties. However, her application seeking to set aside the preliminary decree was allowed by the Court below and challenging the said order, her brother filed an appeal being CMA No.62 of 2006 before this Court and this Court disposed of the said appeal directing the court below to expedite the hearing of the suit. Be that as it may, the main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent Municipal Corporation has not issued any notice to her as contemplated under Section 459 of the Act. According to her, the structural soundness report has to be furnished to her and a reasonable opportunity of hearing should be given to her to substantiate her case but since the same was denied, she approached this Court seeking appropriate directions. On the last occasion, when the matter came up, this Court while ordering status quo to be maintained by the parties, directed the learned standing counsel to produce the file. A perusal of the file indicates that the Commissioner and Special Officer, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation while hearing the petitioner as per the orders of this Court in W.P.No.15468 of 2008 and 14521 of 2007 observed as under; “the Joint Inspection report of Chief Engineer, GHMC was made known to the petitioner that the building is dilapidated & considered unsafe for occupancy. The petitioner made the following submissions before the Commissioner and Special Officer, GHMC: 1. that she requires 2 days time; 2. that the portion of the building baring No.15-8-474 is not dilapidated; 3. that the building has been damaged using crowbars to destablilize the structure by the defendants; 4. that she has the documents for the ownership of the building. Commissioner and Special Officer, GHMC, explained that the ownership documents are not connected with the dilapidated state of building and decided to inspect the structure personally for passing orders.” The learned standing counsel submits that the Commissioner and Special Officer after taking into consideration the material placed by the petitioner as also the report submitted by the Chief Engineer after conducting an inspection of the buildings in question on 10.1.2009 along with the Superintending Engineer-1, GHMC and SAP and ACP-V has passed the impugned orders. It is also submitted that as against the impugned orders, the petitioner has an effective and alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the Civil Court under Section 654(6) of the Act. Admittedly, there appears to be a dispute in regard to the title of the property in question and the same is pending before the Court below. Even though the petitioner submits that she was not given the building soundness report etc., and an opportunity to putforth her case, the file produced before the Court discloses that the Commissioner and Special Officer, GHMC in the proceedings of the hearing as per the orders of this Court in WP No.15468, 15546 of 2008 and WP 14521 of 2007 that the Joint Inspection report of the Chief Engineer, GHMC was made known to the petitioner. In the said proceedings, the submissions made by the petitioner before the Commissioner were also recorded. In those circumstances, the question whether the petitioner was in fact, given a notice and opportunity to putforth her case etc., and whether the report submitted by the Engineers is correct or not are all disputed questions of fact, which cannot be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At any rate, since there is an alternative remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned orders passed under Section 456 of the Act, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 654(6) of the Act before the Civil Court within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till then, status quo obtaining as on date shall be maintained. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.18.3.1009 Note: Furnish CC in one week. (B/o) msv