THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.17736 of 2009 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development appearing for the first respondent and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent. The petitioner-Educational Society, established during the year 2000, claims to have been running Integrated College at Kodada, Nalgonda District, with Engineering, M.B.A., M.C.A., and B.Pharmacy Courses. It states that it purchased land to an extent of Acs.8.00 in Survey No.178 of Gandicheruvu, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District during the year 2008 under a registered sale deed, obtained permission for construction of Ground + two floors along with compound wall in the said land for running the College and started construction. While so, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the first respondent, namely, the District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District, issued notice, dated 12.08.2009, calling upon it to show-cause as to why action should not be taken for demolition of the constructions made stating that it raised the constructions without obtaining necessary permission from the Gram Panchayat and issued proceedings, dated 12.08.2009, directing the second respondent, namely, the Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Gandicheruvu, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, to initiate steps to stop the said unauthorized/illegal constructions, without there being any justifiable reason. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. This Court, while issuing notice before admission, on 25.08.2009 directed the parties to maintain status quo. Thereafter though sufficient time was granted, no counter affidavit has been filed. But, today, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that since the impugned notice is only a show-cause notice, the petitioner may be directed to submit its explanation and after considering the explanation, if any, that may be submitted by the petitioner, appropriate orders would be passed and action would be taken in accordance with law, for which course, the learned counsel for the petitioner expressed no objection. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the interim order of status quo was not extended after 15.12.2009, and therefore, the respondents be directed to maintain status quo till final orders are passed. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit its explanation to the impugned show-cause notice, dated 12.08.2009, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders. Till a final order is passed in the matter, both the parties are directed to maintain status quo. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:12.07.2010 VGB