HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.991 of 2010 Date : 04.10.2010 Between : Damarla Baghya Lakshmi. …..Petitioner And Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, rep. by its Commissioner & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.991 of 2010 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in threatening to demolish her house bearing H.No.31-24- 163 constructed in an area of 144 sq. yards, situated at Ward No.35 in Narlavari Street, Machavaram down, Vijayawada, without issuing any notice and without following due procedure, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that she is in possession of a site admeasuring 144 sq. yards, wherein, she has constructed a house, which is assessed to property tax and given house number as 31-24-163 in Ward No.3 of Vijayawada. It is her grievance that for implementation of the Bus Rapid Transport System (BRTS), respondents are taking steps for demolition of her house without issuing any notice and without conducting any inquiry. A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the respondents, sworn-in by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada. In the counter, it is stated that the petitioner is an encroacher on the canal bund in between the Ryves canal and Eluru road. It is stated that as per the Town Survey record, the site in question is earmarked as a canal bund poramboke, which is in occupation of the petitioner. Counter further states that the petitioner has unauthorisedly raised RCC structure in the said encroached portion, which is also assessed to property tax. In the counter, respondents have stated that a railway line passing through Satyanarayanapuram of Vijayawada city, which is commonly known as ‘Satyanarayanapuram railway track’, was removed by the railway authorities and the said site was handed over to the Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada, which is identified for implementation of the Bus Rapid Transport System under the JNNURM scheme, for encouraging public transport system. It is stated that in implementation of the said BRTS project, the encroachments, which are in the way, are required to be removed for public purpose. Further, it is stated that negotiations were held with all the encroachers and out of a total of 417 encroachers, 408 have accepted the alternative accommodation, proposed by the respondents, but the petitioner, by making false allegations, has approached this Court. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that if the alternative accommodation is provided to the petitioner keeping in mind the extent of land and structures raised by her, the petitioner is also agreeable for the same, which facility is already extended to a number of persons, whose houses are affected in implementation of the Bus Rapid Transport System. In view of the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents, for providing alternative housing, which facility is extended to such affected persons in implementation of the BRTS scheme. If such a representation is made, I am sure that her claim for alternative accommodation will be considered, keeping in mind the extent of petitioner’s land and structures affected in implementation of the BRTS scheme. The writ petition is disposed of, subject to the above observations. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 4th October 2010 ajr