IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 9440 of 2005 Between: 1 U.V.N.Raju, s/o Venkatapathi Raju, r/o Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam. 2 D.S.Sastry, s/o Satyanarayana, r/o Kothagudem, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND Vice Chairman, Sri Satya Sai Urban Development Authority, Puttaparthi, Ananthapur District. .....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 a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the and further directing the respondent herein in proceeding with the process of demolition of Sri Sai Baradwaja Residency at Yenumulapalli, Puttaparthi persuant to the notice in U.C.No.21/2005/TPA, dated 4-3-2005 issued by the respondent as illegal, arbitrary, null and void, unreasonable and violative of Arts.14 and 300A of the Constitution of India and opposed to the Provisions of the Urban Area (Development) Act and pass such other order or orders as may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.A.SREEDHAR Counsel for the Respondent : None appeared The Court made the following : ORDER: None appears for the respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners seek to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in proceeding with the process of demolition of Sri Sai Baradwaja Residency at Yenumulapalli, Puttaparthi pursuant to the notice issued in U.C.No.21/2005/TPA, dated 04.03.2005, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioners that they obtained permission for construction of the building in Sy.No.393 of Yenumulapalli village near Prasanthi Nilayam, Puttaparthi in an extent of land of Ac.0.60 cents for ground floor plus two floors vide Proceeding D.Dis.No.B.A.No.46/2001/B, dated 27.11.2001 from the respondent and the petitioner constructed the said building. It is stated that without specifying any specific deviation, the impugned notice has been issued vaguely. This Court gave direction to the respondent not to demolish the building in question without passing any final orders in pursuance of the show cause notice, dated 04.03.2005. It is not known as to whether any final orders have been passed or not as nothing has been stated in the notice. It appears that final orders have not been passed. But, it is stated that the petitioner has deviated the set backs, but what is the extent of set back has not been indicated in the impugned notice. Having regard to the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice specifying the particulars of deviation said to have been made contrary to the sanctioned plan calling upon the petitioners to explain as to why the said deviations shall not be removed and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:13.03.2008 Ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RS}