IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25740 of 2008 Between: 1 Madipakam Sailaja W/o.Raja Ravindra R/o.10-12-5/4, Rednam Garden Visakhapatnam 2 Mallem Sujatha W/o.Praveen Kumar R/o.10-12-5/4, Rednam Gardens Visakhapatnam ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, rep.by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam 2 Town Planning Officer, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents herein in attempting to demolish the structures (compound walls sheds and gate) in an extent of 471 sq.yards of the petitioners property sitauted Block No.48 TS.No.1048 adjacent to house bearing Door No.10-11-3/3 Rednam Gardens Waltair Road, Visakhapatnam without following the procedure laid down in Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Act or any other Act is arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and it is further prayed that this Hon`ble court may be pleased to direct the respondents to follow the due process of law before taking any further steps towards demolition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.E.V.V.S.RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.25740 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners are owners of houses in Rednam Garden area of Visakhapatnam. It is stated that the houses are abutting a lane. The petitioners complain that the respondents are undertaking widening of the road by utilizing the property of the petitioners without paying any compensation and without initiating proceedings in accordance with law. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for Municipal Corporation. Howsoever useful and attractive the work of widening of a road may be, the properties abutting to same cannot be utilized or taken away without following due procedure prescribed under law. For the benefit of many, the interest of few cannot be sacrificed. The respondents, in particular, the second respondent cannot undertake any work of widening of road in the area where the houses of the petitioners are situated without issuing a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act or bring about settlement through negotiations in respect of the property that is needed for widening of the road. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 24.11.2008 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}