THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 23061 of 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a mandamus to Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to ensure that the construction on premises bearing No. 1-8-450/1/A-27 in Plot No. 27 in Survey No. 194 Part, situated at Indian Airlines Employees’ Housing Colony, Secunderabad is carried strictly in accordance with the sanctioned plan and also to direct the official respondents not to grant any permission/licence to carry on commercial activity in the said premises. The brief facts, which led to filing this writ petition, may be stated as follows: The petitioner is said to be the owner and possessor of the premises bearing H.No.1-8-450/1/A-30, plot No.A-30 in Survey No.194/part, situated at Indian Airlines Employees’ Housing Colony, Secunderabad. His lineage of title can be traced to a letter of allotment, dated 19.02.1989. While so, respondent Nos.3 to 6 who are his neighbours, are carrying out unauthorized constructions in premises bearing No. H.No.1-8-450/1/A-27 in plot No.27 in survey No.194/part, Indian Airlines Employees’ Housing Colony, Secunderabad, in deviation of the sanctioned plan and the provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. Though the petitioner complained about the same on 22.06.2011 and issued legal notice on 22.07.2011, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are not taking any action. Therefore, this writ petition. On behalf of the respondent - Corporation, a counter-affidavit has been filed stating that Respondent Nos. 3 to 6 have constructed stilt and 1st floor in deviation to the sanctioned plan and therefore, the Corporation has issued a show cause notice under Section 452 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) to them. It is further stated that the Corporation would take action, if Respondents 3 to 6 fail to maintain the setbacks as per the sanctioned plan. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contends the official respondents have failed to take action though Respondents 3 to 6 have constructed the building deviating from the sanctioned plan. Learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 contends that the officials of the Municipal Corporation inspected the building in question and found slight deviations from the sanctioned plan and therefore, action would be initiated at the time of releasing the mortgaged property. It is not in dispute that Respondents 3 to 6 have constructed a building after obtaining permission. However, since there was a slight deviation, the Corporation has issued a show cause notice under Section 452 of the Act, directing them to take corrective measures, and if they fail to do so, the Corporation would initiate necessary action. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing Respondents 1 and 2 to take action against respondent Nos. 3 to 6 in accordance with law, pursuant to the notice said to have been issued under Section 452 of the Act. No costs. --------------------- (K.C. BHANU, J) 30th November 2011 ksld