IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that demolition orders must follow due process and should only be executed if significant public interest is at stake, emphasizing the right to appeal.

ORDER :

W.P.No.13258 of 2024

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in proposing/proceeding to demolish the building of the petitioners in the land to an extent of Ac.1-50 cents in Survey No.136-1B1B2A2, HLC Colony, Anantapur under the guise of the Provisional Order vide Notice No.01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024 dated 22.06.2024 and Provisional Order vide U.C. Notice No.02/2024/AHUDA dated 22.06.2024 even without passing the confirmation order as stipulated under the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region & Urban Development Authority Act, 2016.

2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is a regional political party in the State of Andhra Pradesh. It had achieved a remarkable victory in the 2019 Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly Elections by winning 151 seats out of 175 and it was in power for five years. While so as per the policy of the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G.O.Ms.No.340 Revenue (Assn.I) Department dated 21.07.2016 in respect of allotment of government land for locating the offices of the national political parties/recognised political parties, the petitioner’s political party was allotted the subject land vide G.O.Ms.No.371 dated 18.05.2022. The possession handed over certificate was also issued by the Tahsildar, Anantapuram in Rc.No.8/1267/2022/B, dated NIL.12.2022. As per the policy of the State the lease is for a period of 33 years and as per the conditions of the said policy the allottee shall commence and complete the construction of the building on the land within one year from the date of issue of the allotment orders. Pursuant to the handing over of the possession of the subject land, the petitioners also paid property tax for the open land. Then the petitioners submitted building application form to the respondent No.5 vide B.A.No.1107/0084/B/ATP/ ATPRRL/2023 dated 12.10.2023 and in pursuance of the same, the respondent authorities inspected the said land and on comparison of the site measurements and the proposed plan, they have affirmatively stated that the building plan is approved and that the construction work can be commenced. In spite of repeated requests the copy of approval was not made available to the petitioners. Subsequently after lapse of three months the petitioners had commenced the construction and even during the construction time there were periodical inspections by the respondent authorities concerned. The respondent authorities further stated to the petitioners that the building approval is deemed to have been approved as per Section 84(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region & Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016 (for short, “APMRUDA Act”) as the stipulated period of 60 days has elapsed. The said construction of the subject building took place by carrying out the same strictly as per law and in strict compliance with the Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017.

While so, suddenly after the defeat of the petitioner’s political party in the General Elections, 2024, and upon the change of circumstances, to the utter surprise and shock of the petitioners the respondent No.4 of the respondent No.3-Corporation issued provisional order under Sections 452(1) and 461(1) of APMC Act, 1955 and under Sections 89(1 & 2) r/w Sections 82 and 90 (1) of APMRUDA Act, 2016 in Notice No.01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024 dated 22.06.2024 calling upon the petitioners to show sufficient cause as to why the unauthorised construction should not be removed/altered or pulled down within seven days from the date of receipt of the said notice. Similarly, the respondent No.6 representing the office of the respondent No.5 also issued similar provisional order notice under Sections 84(5), 88, 89(1), (2), 90 and 91 of APMRUDA Act, 2016 in U.C.Notice No.02/2024/AHUDA dated 22.06.2024 calling upon the petitioners to show sufficient cause as to why the deviation/violation of the construction should not be removed/alte