HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9205 of 2008 Date: 09.11.2010 Between : Kummari Krishnaiah. …….Petitioner And Aluru Grampanchayat, Aluru, Kurnool District, rep. by its Panchayat Secretary & another. ….Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9205 of 2008 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st respondent-Grampanchayat, in interfering with the construction of compound wall around the petitioner’s house bearing H.No.1-4/1, situated at Aluru village and Mandal of Kurnool District, without passing any orders pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P.No.7180 of 2005, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the house bearing H.No.1-4/1. When construction permission was not granted, he approached this Court earlier in W.P.No.7180 of 2005, in which, directions were issued to consider the representation of the petitioner. It is the grievance of the petitioner that inspite of such directions, no orders are passed. It is stated that, as no orders are passed, on the ground that there is a deemed permission for construction, the petitioner has proceeded with construction of compound wall. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that without passing any orders against the petitioner and without issuing any notice, respondent-Grampanchayat is interfering with the construction of compound wall. Though the writ petition is of 2008, no counter affidavit is filed. Petitioner is claiming that in view of the deemed provision, there is a sanctioned permission and he has constructed the compound wall in accordance with the application made by him. In any event, for removal of unauthorized constructions also, there is a procedure contemplated under the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1995 and Rules made thereunder. Even in such an event, unless the petitioner is issued with prior notice and opportunity, no interference is called for. In the absence of counter affidavit, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, with a direction to the 1st respondent not to interfere with the construction of compound wall of the petitioner. However, it is made clear that if there are any unauthorized constructions, this order will not preclude the respondents from taking steps in accordance with law, by giving prior notice and opportunity to the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 9th November 2010 ajr