IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 10713 of 2008 Between: 1 Smt. Doddy Shoba Rani, W/o. Venata Rao, Female, Hindu, R/O. D.No. 3-20/1, Kottapalem, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam. 2 Sri Dhadi Tata Rao, S/o. Chinaramulu, Male, Hindu, R/O. Kottapalem, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam. 3 Sri Dhadi Chandra Shekar, S/o. Tata Rao, Male, Hindu, R/O. Kottapalem, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam. 4 Sri Sadaram Eshwar Rao, S/o. Lachanna, Male, Hindu, R./o. Marripalem, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam. .....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 to issue any Writ, Order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declarng the high handed attempt of dispossession and demolition by the respondent and its officials of petitioners house properties shown in annexure with necessary details on 7-5-2008 at about 12 P.M. for the purpose of road widening without issuing any notice and without followng due process of law U/s 146 of the HMC Act OR under the Land Acquisition Act by paying the market value for the buildings and site as illegal, arbitrary, capricious and violative of Article 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent not to demolish their buildings and dispossess them from their properties except under due process of law or to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.N.(P).ANJANA DEVI, SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following : ORDER: Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel for respondent-Corporation. This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of writ of Mandamus declaring the high handed attempt of dispossession and demolition by the respondent-Corporation and its officials, of petitioners’ house properties on 7.5.2008 at about 12.00 p.m. for the purpose of road widening without issuing any notice and without following due process of law under Section 146 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act or under the Land Acquisition Act by paying the market value for the buildings and site, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of article 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent-Corporation not to demolish the petitioners’ buildings and dispossess them from their properties except under due process of law. The case of the petitioners is that the first petitioner is the absolute owner of the land to an extent of 65 sq.yds. along with double storied building in Sy.No.65 at Marripalem, Visakhapatnam. Similarly, the second petitioner is the owner of an extent of 117 ½ sq.yds. of site in Sy.No.4/C, plot No.17/A8 of Gopalapatnam along with a house therein. The third petitioner is the owner of an extent of 148 sq.yds. along with a house therein in Sy.No.11/3,4 and 5 of Buchirajupalem, Visakhapatnam. The fourth petitioner is the owner of an extent of 98 sq.yds. of site with house in Sy.No.139/5 of Marripalem, Visakhapatnam. It is alleged that the officials of respondent-Corporation recently proposed for road widening under BRTS (Bus Rapid Transit System) corridor for widening the existing 80 feet road into 100 feet road leading from Visakhapatnam-Araku Road. For the said purpose, the officials of the respondent-Corporation in a high handed manner came to the petitioners’ respective properties on 7.5.2008 at about 12 Noon and put markings over the buildings for the purpose of demolition of the buildings upto the marked portions and attempted to demolish the same. It is their case that the respondent- Corporation have not issued any notice before attempting to demolish their buildings. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that without issuing any notice, the respondent-Corporation is contemplating to demolish the buildings of the petitioners, which is contrary to law. He submits that without following the procedure as contemplated under law, the respondent-Corporation cannot interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over their respective buildings and demolish the same. He further submits that if the buildings of the petitioners are required for demolition, the respondent-Corporation be directed to follow the due process of law. Having regard to the submission made by the counsel for the petitioners, I am of the view that no authority is empowered to demolish the property of a citizen without following the due process of law. In the instant case, according to the petitioners, the officials of respondent-Corporation have marked their buildings for the purpose of demolition in the process of widening of the road. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent-Corporation not to demolish the buildings of the petitioners without following due process of law. It is made clear that if the petitioners’ buildings are required for demolition, it is open for the respondent-Corporation to take necessary action in the matter by following the due process of law. No costs. _________________ G.CHANDRAIAH. J 14th MAY, 2008 Note: Issue C.C. tomorrow (B/o.) Tsr. To 1. The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam 2. Two C.D. copies.