IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19695 of 2004 Between: 1 Smt.Mavidi Rajulamma, W/o.Mavidi Sominaidu, H.No.8-321 & 322 Gopala Patnam Main Road, Visakhapatnam. 2 Sri Mavidi sominaidu, S/o.Mavidi Yerukulamma (Late) H.No.8-321 & 322 Gopala Patnam Main Road, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Commissioner, Vishakapatnam Municipal Corporation, Tenneti Viswanatham Bhavan, Aslimetta, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondent: SRI N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in demolishing building bearing No. 8-321 and 322, without prior notice, and acquiring the same under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) as illegal and unconstitutional. The petitioners claimed compensation of Rs.5 lakhs in addition to the cost of the land and building thereon. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioners. Heard Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. The petitioners claim to be the owners of the above mentioned property said to have been constructed in the year 1972. They have averred that on 07-05-2004, the staff of the Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam with the help of the police demolished the entire building and flattened the same to the ground without issuing any prior notice. They alleged that the said action is illegal, unconstitutional and caused irreparable loss to them. They have, therefore, claimed the above mentioned amount. In the counter-affidavit filed by the City Planner of the respondent-Corporation, it is, inter alia, stated that the Tatipudi drinking water pipeline is passing on the northern side of Visakhapatnam-Araku road (Gopalapatnam main road); that on a bit of open space nearby the said water pipeline, a residential-cum-commercial building was constructed, wherefrom sewage water from bathrooms and toilets was being let into the pipeline site causing pollution to the drinking water and that the entire pipeline site in Survey No.10/2 and road margin of Gopalapatnam main road were acquired by the then Visakhapatnam Municipal Council and accordingly vested in the Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, as evident from FMB record. The respondents, therefore, justified their action of removing the encroachment by demolishing the building. Though the petitioners filed documents such as house tax and electricity receipts, no documents of title have been filed in support of their contention that they are the lawful owners of the property demolished by the respondent-Corporation. As there is a serious dispute regarding the title over the property, in question, it is not possible for this Court to decide such a dispute. Further even assuming that the petitioners are the owners of the property and that the property was illegally demolished, the damage suffered by the petitioners is required to be assessed by the competent civil Court, on the basis of the evidence to be adduced by both the parties. Therefore, in my view, the appropriate remedy for the petitioners is to approach the Court of competent civil jurisdiction to claim damages for the alleged illegal demolition of the property in question. Subject to this liberty, the writ petition is dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 27th February, 2009 vrn