IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4911 of 2003 Between: 1 M.Upendranath, S/o Late M.obulapathi, R/o Plot No.201, II Floor, Chandrapriya Apartment, Adimoorthy Nagar, Ananthapur. 2 M.Vidyaranya, S/o Lte M.Obulapathi R/o Plot No.201, II Floor, Chandrapriya Apartment, Adimoorthy Nagar, Ananthapur. 3 M.Hari Gopal, S/o M.Upendranath, R/o Plot No.201, II Floor, Chandrapriya Apartment, Adimoorthy Nagar, Ananthapur. 4 M.L.N.Prasad, S/o Satyanarayana Setty, R/o D.No.7/290, Rahamath Nagar, Ananthapur. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Commissioner, Ananthapur Municipality, Ananthapur. 2 T.Narayana Sharma, S/o T.Narayana Sastry R/o 15/716, Kamalanagar, Ananthapur. 3 District Collector, Ananthapur. 4 Sri Nagendra, Regional Town Planning Officer, Ananthapur. .....RESPONDENTS 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, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring action of Respondent Nos.1,3 and 4 in interfering with the civil dispute including the notice No.6/2003 - III dated 3-3-2003 of the first respondent as illegal, malafide and without jurisdiction Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.V.SUBRAHMANYA NARUSU The Court made the following : ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed challenging the Demolition Notice, dated 03-03-2003, issued by the first respondent/Commissioner, Anantapur Municipality (presently Municipal Corporation) in exercise of powers under Section 228 (3) of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965. By the aforesaid order, the Commissioner has confirmed the Provisional Order, dated 27-02-2003. The petitioners have questioned the said notice mainly on the ground that they have not received any notice as contemplated under Section 228 (1) & (2) of the A.P. Municipalities Act and as such there was no occasion for them to file objections to the Provisional Order passed under Section 228 (1) of the A.P. Municipalities Act. At the stage of admission, this Court, by order, dated 20th March, 2003, granted interim orders staying demolition pursuant to impugned notice. Though the said order passed by this Court has been in force since then and the writ petition is of the year 2003, no counter-affidavit is filed. Heard Sri M.V.Durga Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri S.I.Newton, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/Municipal Corporation. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and especially in view of the categorical statement of the petitioner that the impugned orders are not preceded by any notice issued under Section 228 (1) and (2) of the Act, which is referred to as reference No.1 in the impugned proceedings, I deem it appropriate to quash the notice, dated 03-03-2003, passed in proceedings No.6/2003-III on the ground that the impugned notice is not preceded by any Provisional Order as contemplated under Section 228 (1) and (2) of the Act. For the aforesaid reasons, the Notice, dated 03-03- 2003, passed in proceedings No.6/2003-III, is quashed. However, it is made clear that if any constructions are made in deviation to the sanctioned plan, it is open to the respondents to take steps in accordance with law. Subject to above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J. 22nd July, 2009. skmr