Authorities must conduct physical inspections and provide specific details of violations before issuing demolition notices under the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority Act.

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Proceedings in R.C.No.MAU61-DPOAMRV (OTH) /1/2025-DP, dated 04.01.2025 issued by 3^rd respondent against the 1^st petitioner herein, threatening to seize, demolish, penalty and dispossess from petitioners new construction RCC building situated in D.No.121 /A3A, 121/B2A, near Door No.3-638/4, Jama Oil Thota Road, Tadepalli Mandal, Guntur District without following procedure established by law as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority Act, 2014 and violation of principles of natural justice and also Articles 14, 15, 16, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and also to set aside the said proceedings and consequently to direct the respondents 2 to 4 not to seize, demolish, penalty and dispossess the petitioners from his RCC building and pass such other order or orders …..”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is the absolute owner and possessor of the house site admeasuring to an extent of 233.93 Sq.yds or 195.59 Sq.feet situated in Sy.No.121/A3A and Sy.No.121/B2A, near Door No.3-638/4, Jama Oil Thota Road, Undavalli Gram Panchayat, Tadepalli Mandal, Guntur District. While so, the petitioner herein obtained permission for construction of a building with Ground + 3 floors as a residential building, for which, the petitioner executed a mortgage deed in favor of the 1^st respondent on 10.08.2022. He further submits that at the stage of completion of construction, the respondents herein issued an impugned notice dated 04.01.2025 stating that the petitioner got constructed Ground + 4 floors which is contrary to the permission granted and further the petitioner also not adhered to the setback norms as per the plan sanctioned by the 1^st respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the said notice was received on 08.01.2025. He further submits that the petitioner herein had constructed common amenities like lift room, water tank, closure of stair case and elevation works only in the 4^th floor and also maintained setbacks. Without proper measurements, demarcation and physical inspection of the same, the respondents boldly stated that the petitioner not maintained setbacks as required as per the plan. He further submits that without there being proper demarcation, proper measurements, the 1^st respondent cannot issue such a notice under Section 116(1) of Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority Act, 2014. Hence, the impugned notice dated 04.01.2025 is liable to be set aside.

5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent submits that since it is only a show cause notice, let there be a detailed explanation from the petitioner to the show cause notice. On receipt of such explanation, the respondents will inspect, demarcate, measure the deviations, if any taken place while constructing the subject building. If any illegal construction/ deviations are found, the same can be noted and appropriate orders will be passed by the respondents, within a reasonable time.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and on perusal of the material placed on record, the fact remains that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property and after obtaining due permission from the 1^st respondent in the month of August, 2022, the petitioner got constructed a new building with Ground+3 floors. It is further observed that the petitioner also executed a mortgage deed in favour of the 1^st respondent as per terms of G.O.Ms.No.119 dated 28.03.2017, authorizing