IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20228 of 2008 Between: Smt.B.Venkatamma W/o.Nagaiah R/o.H.No.1-9-269, Adikmet, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad, rep. by its Commissioner. .....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 a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, declaring the action of the Respondent in insisting for production of "No Objection Certiﬁcate" from the District Collector for receiving and considering the application for grant of permission to make construction in the Plot admeasuring 120 Sq. Yards covered in Survey No.60, situated at Adikmet, Hyderabad, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to receive and consider the application of the petitioner without insisting upon the submission of "No Objection Certiﬁcate" from the District Collector, to make construction in the said plot, situated at Adikmet, Hyderabad, and pass such other orders as are necessary in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.BRAHMADANDI RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition has been ﬁled by B.Venkatamma, assailing the action of the respondent in insisting for production of no objection certiﬁcate from the District Collector for receiving and considering the application for grant of permission to make construction in 120 square yards of land in S.No.60, situated at Adikmet, Hyderabad. The petitioner claims to be owner and possessor of the plot in S.No.60 situated at Adikmet. She claims to have purchased the plot from G.Nagender for a valid consideration through a registered sale deed, dated 06.06.1980. When she applied for building permission, the respondent insisted for production of no objection certificate. Hence, the writ petition. When the writ petition came up for consideration, Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Municipal Corporation received notice. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for both the parties agreed that the issue raised in the writ petition is covered by judgment of this Court in HYDERABAD POTTERIES PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COLLECTOR, HYDERABAD DISTRICT AND ANOTHER[1]. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to entertain the building permission of the petitioner without insisting no objection certiﬁcate and pass orders in accordance with the provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and the Rules made thereunder. No order as to costs. _______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY J., Dt.17.09.2008 tjs ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to the Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2.2CD copies [1] ) 2001 (3) ALD 600