IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 11582 of 1999 Between: 1 P.V.Balaji, S/o. P.Vamana Rao, R/o. Puttaparthy, Ananthapur District. 2 B.Ramakrishna Rao, S/o. B.Balavenkata Swamy, R/o. Chitravati Road, Puttaparthy, Ananthapur District. 3 P.Adinarayana Reddy, S/o. Narayana Reddy, R/o. Janakampalli, Bukkapatnam Post and Mandal, Ananthapur District. 4 Y.Vijay Kumar, S/o. E.N.Sankarappa, R/o. Kothachervu, Ananthapur District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Sri Satya Sai Urban Development Authority, Rep. by its Vice Chairman, Puttaparthy, Ananthapur District. 2 Mandal Revenue Officer, Puttapurthy, Ananthapur. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the proceedings dated 9.2.99 in order No. 3/99/TP-III by which we are directed to remove the structures raised by us as illegal, arbitrary and further declare that no steps for demolition can be taken by the respondents and pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 11582 OF 19992005 ORAL ORDER: Petitioners 2 and 3 have purchased an extent of 13 cents of land in S.No. 48/2 of Enumulapalli Village of Puttaparthy Mandal (Outskirts of Puttaparthy) from one Sri M. Gangadhari and the fourth petitioner purchased 20 cents of land in the same survey number under various registered sale deeds. The first petitioner entered into development agreement with petitioners 2,3, and 4 by obtaining registered general power of attorney from them and thereafter, obtained sanctioned plan or approved plan vide proceedings of the first respondent in D.Dis.B.A. No. 57/98/B, dated 17-9.1998 for construction of a stilt plus ground floor plus two. It is stated that the roof of the fourth floor was also constructed without any deviation of the sanctioned plan. While so, on a compliant filed by the original owner Mr. M. Venkatesh, the first respondent issued a notice dated 1.2.1999 alleging that there is an unauthorized construction forgetting the fact that they have given permission for construction. It is stated that though they made a representation about the sanctioned plan, final order dated 9.2.1999 in Order No. 3/99/TP-III has been issued. Therefore, it is stated that the said order is illegal and without any reference to the sanctioned plan. In fact the said Mr. Venkatesh, who has given a compliant, already filed W.P.No. 10116 of 1999 against the petitioners herein and the said Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn, as the matter was settled out of the court by an order dated 10.02.2003. As no counter affidavit is forthcoming from the first respondent disputing the sanctioned plan, the Writ Petition is disposed of keeping it open for the respondents to issue fresh show cause notice if there is any deviation while constructing the building contrary to the sanctioned plan. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of as indicated above. No order as to costs. ____________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Date: 27.03.2008 KA ---- REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Sri Satya Sai Urban Development Authority, Rep. by its Vice Chairman, Puttaparthy, Ananthapur District. 2 Mandal Revenue Officer, Puttapurthy, Ananthapur. 3. 2CCs to GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 4. 2CD copies