THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.30276 of 2011 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.1 in issuing proceedings vide No.UC/TPS/C3/E2/GHMC/2011, dated 01.11.2011, as arbitrary and illegal and set aside the same and consequently direct the first respondent to submit objections to the show cause notice before taking up of demolition. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner purchased the plot bearing No.34-A in Survey No.108 admeasuring 240 square yards in Block No.3 of Snehapuri Colony, Nagole Village, Ranga Reddy District, from one A.Ramachandra Reddy under a registered sale deed dated 11.10.1999. He had applied for permission to the Municipality for construction of house in the said plot and the then Commissioner of L.B.Nagar Municipality vide proceedings dated 05.01.2006 granted permission for construction. Thereafter, he started construction in the said plot in accordance with the sanctioned plan. However, the Municipal Council, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy issued a show cause notice dated 17.05.2006 stating that an extent of 500 square yards is earmarked for Grampanchayat, Nagole. Challenging the same, he filed O.S.No.3272 of 2006 and obtained injunction against the Municipality. While so, the second respondent approached the first respondent on 16.08.2008 behind his back and lodged an objection petition for demolition of the structures on the ground that he is proceeding with illegal construction since the said property was earmarked for park as per the layout. Subsequently, the second respondent issued another objection-cum-notice dated 20.10.2011 to the petitioner to stop construction. Based on the same, the first respondent through the Deputy Commissioner, Circle III, GHMC issued notice under Sections 452(1) and 461 (1) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) dated 27.10.2011 stating that the petitioner is making unauthorised constructions in the cellar, and accordingly directed him to stop construction and to give reply within three days from the date of receipt of a copy of that notice. The grievance of the petitioner is that even before any reply is made by him to the said notice, the first respondent has issued the impugned notice under Section 452 (2) of the Act stating that he is making unauthorised constructions in the cellar by raising pillars and directed him to stop the work forthwith and to submit a reply within three days, failing which further action will be taken to remove the unauthorised constructions. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is constructing the building strictly in accordance with the sanctioned plan; that notice under Sections 452 (1) & 461 (1) of the Act was issued to him calling for explanation granting three days time and that even before expiry of the time granted in the said notice, the impugned proceedings have been issued to demolish the unauthorised constructions. Therefore, he prays to set aside the same. 4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent Corporation contends that if the petitioner submits his explanation in pursuance of the notice dated 27.10.2011, the same will be considered and appropriate decision will be taken thereon by the respondent Corporation. 5. The petitioner is said to have obtained sanctioned plan for the purpose of construction of house. The allegation is that he is unauthorisedly constructing cellar by raising pillars in the site in question. The contention of the petitioner is that there is no cellar in the site in question and it is only a ground floor and that he is making construction strictly in accordance with the sanctioned layout. A notice dated 27.10.2011 was given to the petitioner calling for his explanation within three days. According to the petitioner, the said notice was received by him on 29.10.2011 and even before expiry of three days time granted therein for submitting his explanation, the impugned order is passed on 01.11.2011. 6. In the circumstances, the impugned proceedings dated 01.11.2011 is set aside and the petitioner is directed to give an explanation in pursuance of the show cause notice dated 27.10.2011, within a period of one week from today, and the first respondent Corporation shall consider the same and take appropriate decision in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. K.C. BHANU, J Date: 25.11.2011 va