IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21798 of 2003 Between: K.Muralidhar Rao S/o K.Venkatarama Narsaiah K.Muralidhar Rao, S/o K.Venkatarama Narsaiah, Plot No.3, Sy.No.175/2, New Maruthi Nagar, Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Municipal Commissioner, Ranga Reddy. The Municipal Commissioner, L.B.Nagar Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. .....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 declaring the action of the respondents as highly arbitrary and against principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondent not to demolish the structures constructed in the site Plot no.3 admeasuring 269.32 situated in Sy.no.175/2, New Maruthi Nagar, Kothapet, Ranga reddy District without following the due procedure established under law and pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble court. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.M.K.CHAITANYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 The Court made the following : ORDER : In this Writ Petition it is the grievance of the petitioner that the Respondent/Commissioner is taking steps for demolition of the structures constructed by him in an area of 269.32 square yards, covered by Plot No.3, situated in Sy.No.175/2 at Maruthi Nagar, Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District, without following the provisions of the A.P. Municipalities Act. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition it is stated that he has taken permission for constructions vide proceedings No.G2/BP/181/2003, dated 15-03-2003. It is his grievance that the respondent is making attempts for demolition of the conference hall in the third floor without due process of law and without passing any Provisional Order. At the stage of admission this Court directed the respondent to maintain status quo by order, dated 15-10- 2003, and the said order has been in force since then. Though the writ petition is of the year 2003, no counter affidavit is filed denying the allegations made by the petitioner. Under Section 228 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act it is specified that if any construction of any building is commenced without obtaining the permission, then the Commissioner or Chairperson, as the case may be, is required to pass Provisional Order at the first instance by giving opportunity for objections to the owner of the property. Under Section 228(3) of the Act if the owner fails to show cause to the satisfaction of the said officer, he may confirm the order with such modification as he thinks fit to make and such order shall then be binding on the owner. In the instant case, in spite of specific allegations of the petitioner that respondent has not followed such procedure, the said allegation is not denied by way of counter-affidavit. In view of the fact that there is no denial of the allegation of the petitioner and further status quo order passed by this Court on 15-10- 2003 continued all along during the pendency of the Writ Petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondent not to take steps for demolition of the structures constructed by the petitioner in an area of 269.32 square yards, covered by Plot No.3, situated in Sy.No.175/2 at Maruthi Nagar, Kothapet, Ranga Reddy District, without due process of law. However, it is made clear that if there are any constructions not governed by regularization, it is open for the Respondent/Municipality to take steps by giving appropriate opportunity to the petitioner in accordance with law. Subject to above directions the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J. 20th July, 2009. skmr