IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 4502 of 2009 Between: Yogender Kumar Sharma S/o. Late Ram Kumar Sharma R/o. H.No. 21-2-478, 453, 452/3 & 452/1, Near Mitti Ka Sher, Gulzar House, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep. by its Commissioner Hyderabad. 2 The Assistant Commissioner Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Circle - II, Sardar Mahal, Hyderabad. .....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 more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent corporation in trying to demolish the constructions of the petitioner on the premises bearing H.No.21-2-478, 21-2-453, and 21-2-452/1 & 3 situated at Near Mitti Ka Sher, Gulzar House, Hyderabad, without following any procedure known to law as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violative of Land Acquisition Act, and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the above said premises and not to demolish the same. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SRI KRISHNA SHARMA Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 4502 of 2009 Oral order: The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of three houses bearing Municipal Nos. 21-2-478, 21-2-453 and 21-2-452/1 to 3, admeasuring 275 Sq.yds., Near Mitti Ka Sher, Gulzar House, Hyderabad, and it is his grievance that the respondents without issuing any notice and without acquiring his land, are trying to demolish the houses and take his land for road widening, and that though he made representation to respondent No.1 on 02.03.2009, requesting him to restrain his officials from demolition o f the house, no action thereon had been taken. On instructions, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents do not require the properties of the petitioner, covered by the writ petition, and that they have not taken any steps to demolish the houses of the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, and having regard to the stand taken by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: Respondent No.2, namely the Assistant Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, is directed to consider and dispose of the representation dated 02.03.2009 of the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law. However, this order will not preclude the respondents from taking the land of the petitioner for the purpose of road widening by following the due process of law, and till such time, Status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 04th March, 2009 KSR