IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7977 of 2002 Between: Smt. Mehrukh Sultana @ Parrybanu, W/o. K.Jaffrey R/o. H.No. 8-2-438/4, Road No.4, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KANAKAMEDALA RAVINDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.G.JYOTHI KIRAN The Court made the following : Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in seeking to interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of her building, constructed in pursuance of permit No.198/50, dated 03-12-2001 in premises bearing door No.8-2-438/4, situated in Road No.6, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, as illegal. Heard Sri Uday Bhaskar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.Kodanda Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent- Corporation. A perusal of the record shows that a person by name Dr.C.R.Rajagopalam filed W.P.No.5457 of 2002 for a writ of mandamus to declare the constructions of multi- storied building in premises bearing No.8-2-538/6, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, as illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), and the Multi-storied Building Regulations, 1981. The petitioner therein also sought for demolition of the said building. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 27-03-2002, wherein a direction was given to the respondents therein to consider and dispose of the representations made by Dr.C.R.Rajagopalam and take appropriate action in accordance with law. Subsequently on 19-04-2002, the Assistant City Planner, Town Planning Section, Circle-5 of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, replied to the said Dr.C.R.Rajagopalam by stating that the respondents therein have already initiated action for the deviations made in the sanctioned plan by the petitioner. Alleging that the respondent herein has been interfereing with the petitioner’s possession without initiating any action under the provisions of the Act, the present Writ Petition is filed. No counter-affidavit is filed by the respondent. Since, the only grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent cannot interfere with the petitioner’s property without initiating the proceedings under the provisions of the Act, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent not to take any action without giving notice to the petitioner under Section 452 of the Act. It is made clear that if the respondent found any deviations having been committed by the petitioner in constructing the building, they are at liberty to put the petitioner to notice before embarking upon taking action for such deviations. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 27-02-2008 LUR