IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 13041 OF 2010 Between: Smt.G.Armitha Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner and Special Officer, Hyderabad and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.13041 OF 2010 O R D E R : The petitioner was served with a notice under Section 452 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) alleging that the petitioner had commenced the construction work in deviation of his sanctioned plan and calling upon the petitioner to submit her explanation within seven days. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted her explanation dated 26.03.2010, which was received in the office of the Corporation on 27.03.2010. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 01.06.2010 came to be passed under Section 636 of the Act, directing removal of the alleged unauthorised constructions within three hours. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is apparent that the impugned order dated 01.06.2010 which was absolutely silent about the explanation offered by the petitioner dated 26.03.2010 was passed mechanically without application of mind to any of the relevant factors. Such an order, in my considered opinion is in violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 01.06.2010 is set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s explanation dated 26.03.2010 and pass appropriate orders afresh in accordance with law. No costs. ​ ____________ Date: 14.06.2010 G. ROHINI, J Note: Issue CC of order in two days (B/o) Ivd