THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18451 OF 2010 DATE: 02.08.2010 Between: M.Narasing Rao ..... PETITIONER AND Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Deputy Commissioner, Secunderabad .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18451 OF 2010 ORDER : The petitioner herein claims title and possession in respect of house bearing No.12-10-98, Seethaphalmandi, Secunderabad. It is stated that in the year 2003 the petitioner was asked by the respondent-Corporation to give consent for utilizing 27.77 sq.yards out of his property for the purpose of road widening and accordingly got his house demolished to the extent required by the Corporation and handed over the possession. Thereafter, the petitioner got constructed the house wherein he is staying. While so, the impugned letter dated 06.07.2010 was received, whereunder the petitioner was informed that the respondent-Corporation had again proposed to widen the road for which purpose another extent of 31.50 sq.yards is required from the petitioner’s house property. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed contending that as the road was already widened, there is no reason to deprive the petitioner further land from his house property. It is also contended that in pursuance of the impugned letter, if the land to an extent of 31.50 sq.yards is acquired from the petitioner’s house property he would be totally displaced. Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Corporation, submitted that under the impugned letter the petitioner was only asked to give his consent to hand over advance possession of the effected area for the purpose of road widening in the larger interest of the public and in case he is not willing to hand over the possession the respondent would take the necessary proceedings in accordance with Section 147 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. Since it is apparent from the impugned letter itself that the petitioner was only asked to give his consent to hand over the possession, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to give his reply to the impugned letter dated 06.07.2010 within a period of one week from today. On receipt of such reply the respondent shall take the necessary further action in accordance with law. No costs. ____________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 02.08.2010 Ivd