THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.31223 of 2011 ORDER: 1 . This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in attempting to demolish the house of the petitioner and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish the house. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner is the absolute owner of 300 square yards of house site situated in Survey No.185/1 of Sanathnagar, Chinagantyada Village, Gajuwaka Zone, Visakhapatnam, having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 02.09.2010. He applied to the first respondent for sanction of plan to construct a residential unit consisting of ground floor and first floor and the same was sanctioned vide proceedings dated 30.10.2010 and D.No.24-81- 5/1 was given to his house. Accordingly, he constructed a house within the permissible limits of the sanctioned plan and there may be some minor deviations during the construction of the house, which are negligible. He is an active participant in politics and at the instigation of his political rivals, the respondents attempted to demolish his house, without giving any notice and opportunity of being heard. Since he is a middleclass man and constructed the said house by raising huge amount by way of loan from the Bank, he may be permitted to get the deviations in the constructions regularised by paying the penalty and by fulfilling the formalities of the respondent Municipal Corporation. Further, the Government is issuing G.Os periodically to regularise the deviations in the constructions under Building Regularisation Scheme, and hence the action of the respondents in attempting to demolish his house without following due process of law is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that even though the petitioner had constructed the house in accordance with the sanctioned plan and leaving the required set backs, the respondents are trying to demolish his house without following due process of law, and therefore, he prays to issue direction to the respondents not to demolish the house of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation contends that if the house of the petitioner is constructed in accordance with the sanctioned plan, the respondents would not interfere with the same. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner obtained a sanction from the competent authority for construction of the house. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there are certain deviations in making construction of the house, but there are no deviations with regard to the set backs as prescribed under the Building Rules. Therefore, it is for the respondents to verify as to whether the building has been constructed in accordance with the sanctioned plan or not and after verification if they found any deviations, they can initiate appropriate action by following due process of law. 6 . The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the respondents to take appropriate decision in accordance with law, after calling for the explanation from the petitioner, if there are any deviations. Till then, the house of the petitioner shall not be demolished. There shall be no order as to costs. K.C. BHANU, J Date: 25.11.2011 va