IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 12152 of 2007 Between: 1 Sri Omini RAtnam W/o.Chinna Rao R/o.D.No.8-188/2, Thota garuvu, B.T.R. Nagar, China Gadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam - 40. 2 Omini Yerramma W/o.Kanaka Raju R/o.D.No.8-188/2, China Gadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam - 40. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND Greater Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam rep. by Commissioner. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue any writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the high handed attempt of dispossessing petitioners and demolishing their house bearing D.No. 8-188/2, situated in Sy.No.55 Thota Garuvu, B.T.R. Nagar china Gadili Mandl, Visakhapatnam - 40 on 04.06.2007 and 06.06.2007 by the employees of the respondent without following due process of law is arbitrary, capricious and violation of Article 21 and Article 300A of Constitution of India and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the respondent not to demolish their house bearing D.No. 8-188/2, situated in Sy.No.55 Thota Garuvu, B.T.R. Nagar china Gadili Mandl, Visakhapatnam - 40 except under due process of law or to pass any other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.N.(P).ANJANA DEVI, SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by Omini Ratnam and Omini Yerramma with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent-Corporation in taking steps to demolish the constructions made by the petitioners without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 21 and 300- A of the Constitution of India. 2. Smt.O.Omini Ratnam has sworn to the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. The averments of the writ affidavit in brief are: The petitioners are residents of Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation. Their lands were taken away by the government for public purpose. In the year 1994 the members of the Balaheena Vargala Abyudaya Seva Sangam, B.T.R.Nagar, Thotagaruvu, Visakhapatnam, were allotted 90 sq. yards site each in Survey No.55. Two plots were allotted to the petitioners. They put up asbestos sheets roof shed in the site admeasuring 180 sq. yards allotted to them. When the respondent-Corporation resorted to demolish the constructions made by them without following the due process of law, the petitioners approached this Court by invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Notice before admission has been ordered on 12.06.2008. Respondent-Corporation filed counter-affidavit. P.Bhaskar, Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, has sworn to the counter-affidavit. It is stated in para.6 of the counter- affidavit that the respondent-Corporation has followed the due process of law and issued a notice under Sections 405, 406 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and opportunity was to the petitioners, but the petitioners suppressed the fact of issuing a notice and approached this Court to get undue advantage. It is further stated that the encroachment was removed departmentally on 11.06.2007, only after following due process of law. 4. Reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioners. It is stated in the reply affidavit that on 01.11.2007 the officials of the respondent- Corporation visited the house of the petitioners and took some photographs in connection with the granting of loan of Rs.70,000/- for construction of pucca house under ‘Indiramma Pathakam’. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that structures are existing as on this day and therefore, the respondent- Corporation is to be directed to follow the due process of law in the event of the structures put up by the petitioners are required to be demolished. 7. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent- Corporation reports that the respondent-Corporation will proceed with the demolition of the unauthorized structures put up by the petitioners in accordance with the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. 8. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage directing the respondent-Corporation to follow the due process of law while removing the unauthorized structures allegedly made by the petitioners. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:18th June, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}