IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3856 of 2007 Between: N. Alakananda, W/o.N. jaya Prakash, R/o. H.No.9-9-118, Vishwakarma Veedi, Girmajipet, Warangal. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Municipal Corpaorationof Warangal, rep. by its Commissioner, S.V.n. road, Warangal. 2 Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, rep. by its Vice Chairman, Behind Ashoka Hotel, Main road, Hanmakonda, Warangal. .....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 issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate order declaring the action of the respondents putting a red mark on the house of the petitioner, bearing H.No. 9-9-118, situated at Vishwakarma Veedi, Girmajipet, Warangal for the purpose of illegal demolishing and threatening to demolish the building within one week for the purpose of road widening without paying any compensation to the petitioner, and pass any such further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to meet the ends of Justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.BASWA RAJ Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.D.NAGESWARA RAO The Court made the following: O R D E R: 1. This Writ Petition has been ﬁled by N.Alakananda assailing the action of respondents in contemplating to demolish house bearing No.9-9-118, situated at Vishwakarma Veedi, Girmajipet, Warangal without following due process of law. 2. The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of house bearing No.9-9-118, situated at Vishwakarma Veedi, Girmajipet, Warangal admeasuring 74.28 square meters equivalent to 88.86 square yards having got it under a gift settlement deed dated 1.4.1998 executed by U.Andalamma. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondents are contemplating to demolish his house without following due process of law for road widening. 4. On issuance of notice, respondents entered appearance through a counsel, but did not choose to file counter affidavit. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the record. 6. The principal grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are contemplating to demolish the house owned by him for road widening without following due process of law. 7. It is needless to say that the respondents are bound to follow the procedure as per law before initiating any demolition activity. In view of the same, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to follow due process of law in the event of the house owned by the petitioner herein is required for demolition in road widening. 11th November, 2008. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) tnb ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JGK} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.3856 OF 2007 11-11-2008