THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2762 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner is the owner of premises bearing No.7-1-277/59/25 (73 L.I.G. II) at B.K.Guda, Hyderabad. It appears that he made construction upon the plot without obtaining any permission. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.901, dated 31.12.2007, providing for regularization of unauthorized constructions subject to certain conditions. The petitioner submitted an application before the third respondent to avail that remedy. The third respondent rejected the application of the petitioner on 30.04.2008. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal before the fourth respondent as provided under the scheme. The appeal was rejected by the fourth respondent through order dated 28.12.2010. The same is challenged in this Writ Petition. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent. The petitioner availed the remedy of appeal before the fourth respondent. An appellate authority is conferred with the power to reexamine the entire issue and to arrive at its own conclusions. Further, various contentions urged by the petitioner need to be taken into account and the record must be perused. The petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.2265 of 2000 when he apprehended threat of demolition after the third respondent rejected his application on 30.04.2008. While protecting the interest of the petitioner, this Court directed the fourth respondent to pass appropriate orders within the time stipulated therein. After mentioning this fact, the only observation made by the fourth respondent in his order reads as under: “In obedience to the above orders, the issue is examined and it is to inform you that the decision taken by this office by rejecting your application holds good and the said building cannot be regularized at this juncture”. For all practical purposes, the fourth respondent has reduced the appellate jurisdiction to an empty formality. He was supposed to refer to the grounds urged by the petitioner and assign his own reasons for arriving at the conclusions. The impugned order cannot be sustained in law. It is accordingly set aside. The Writ Petition is allowed and the fourth respondent is directed to pass a detailed reasoned order on the appeal of the petitioner. Till such time, no steps shall be taken against the premises of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Date.09.02.2011 Usd