At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside notice bearing No.01/ACP/C5/GHMC/S2/2011, dated 02.07.2011, in respect of premises bearing Nos.15-5-581/1, 15-5-581/2 and 15-5-581/3 in Survey Nos.17 and 19 of Thotaguda Village, Nampally Mandal, Hyderabad District.

3. The petitioner claims that his father and uncle purchased land admeasuring Ac.0.30 guntas in Survey No.17 and Ac.0.24 guntas in Survey No.19 from one Mali Muthemma, who claimed to be the pattadar and possessor of the said land, by way of an unregistered sale deed on payment of Rs.925/- as consideration. After the demise of the petitioner’s father in the year 1960 and his uncle in the year 1979, the petitioner along with his two brothers claim to be in possession of the property. When the petitioner approached the Mandal Revenue Officer, Musheerabad, he was informed that the property was recorded as Government land in the pahanies for the year 1982-83. That the petitioner approached the District Revenue Officer, Hyderabad for correction of entries and after a detailed enquiry, the District Revenue Officer has issued proceedings, dated 07.03.1987, directing correction of entries and restore title of Mali Muthemma and that thereafter, the Mandal Revenue Officer has effected mutation in favour of the petitioner along with his two brothers and passbooks were also issued in the name of the petitioner and his two brothers. In the appeal filed against the said order by one Smt.Laxmamma and another, the parties are relegated to civil Court, which order was confirmed in W.P.No.5603 of 1991 and that the petitioner filed O.S.No.1796 of 1997 in the Court of the learned IV Additional District Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for permanent injunction against the said person and the said suit was decreed on 23.10.1997. The appeal filed against the said judgment and decree in A.S.No.14 of 1998 was dismissed on 24.09.2001 by the Court of the learned X Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

4. The petitioner further averred that the Joint Collector, Hyderabad District issued proceedings, dated 20.01.1995, declaring that the schedule property is an escheat land. W.P.No.34794 of 1998 filed questioning the said order was disposed of by this Court by order, dated 31.08.2005, by setting aside the proceedings of the Joint Collector and held that the invocation of the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Escheats and Bona Vacantia Act, 1974 is not permissible. When respondent Nos.1 and 2 sought to remove the sheds erected by the petitioner in the year 2006 for carrying on banana fruit business, the petitioner filed W.P.No.27182 of 2006, wherein an order of status quo was initially granted. Thereafter, when the matter was further heard, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 represented that they are not contemplating to interfere with the petitioner’s possession, and accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of recording the said submission. The petitioner averred that the respondents visited the premises in the month of June, 2009 and tried to interfere with his possession on which he approached respondent Nos.1 and 2 and has shown the order of this Court, on which, they have stopped interference.

5. The petitioner further averred that again respondent No.1 visited his premises and issued show-cause notice, dated 20.06.2011, under Sections 452(1) and 461(1) of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). The petitioner submitted his reply, dated 25.06.2011, wherein he has stated in detail that he has erected a structure replacing the earlier structure and that the same does not constitute erection of a building within the meaning of Section 433 of the Act and that therefore, the provisions of Section 452(1) and 461(1) of the Act are not attract