HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

ORDER:

The instant writ petition is filed to grant the following relief:

“.. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction one more particularly in the nature of ‘WRIT OF CERTORAI’ declaring the action of the respondents in issuing show- cause notice file No.6488/CSC/TP-12/WZ/GHMC/2012, dated 29.06.2013 and subsequent cancellation of the building permission through Proc.No.6488/CSC/TP-12/WZ/ GHMC/2012 dated 17.07.2013 is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and set aside the same and permit the petitioner to proceed with the construction in compliance with the building plan accorded by the respondent through permit No.17694/DC/WZ/Cir-12/2012 dated 06.12.2012 and pass such other order or orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, and subsequently, during pendency of the writ petition, this Court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner based on the reply submitted by architect dated 18.07.2013 and as well as by this petitioner dated 29.07.2013 and may be pleased to pass such other order(s) as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of

the case.”

2. Heard Sri S.Ravindranath, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for

respondents. Perused the record.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has purchased a plot bearing No.12 in Survey No.45 (Part), admeasuring 207.8 Sq.yards situated at Miyapur Village, Serilingampally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, by virtue of a registered sale deed bearing Doc.No.6179 of 2007, dated 12.04.2007 from M/s. R.Krishna Reddy and others for a valid sale consideration.

The petitioner made an application for regularization under the LRS Scheme, which was examined by respondent No.1 vide proceedings No. LRS/40000/CR-12/West Zone/GHMC/2008, dated 03.07.2009, and the plots bearing Nos. 12, 14, and 15, admeasuring a total extent of 1153.34 sq. meters, were regularized. It is further contended that subsequently, in order to develop the property, the petitioner applied for permission on 14.09.2012 to construct a building by enclosing all the relevant documents by paying the appropriate fee to the respondents under Sections 388, 428 and 433 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act, 1955’). The petitioner was sanctioned a house plan vide Permit No.17694/DC/WZ/Cir-12/2012, dated 06.12.2012 consisting of stilt plus two upper floors.

4. It is further contended that basing upon the complaint of certain vested interested persons, the employees of the respondents came to the site, partially demolished four pillars abutting the road on 31.03.2013 and directed the petitioner to stop the construction. It is further contended that the respondent-Corporation, without following due procedure under the Act, 1955 and without assigning any reason, straightaway cannot demolish the construction, which was being carried in pursuance of the valid sanctioned plan, dated

06.12.2012.

5. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that surprisingly, on 29.06.2013 the petitioner was served with a show- cause notice stating that the Town Planning Supervisor of the respondents’ Office alleged to have visited and inspected the site under construction and found that the building permission was obtained for construction of ground + two upper floors in Plot No.12 in Sy.No.45(P) situated at Miyapur, Serilingampally by misrepresenting the facts by not mentioning the tower lines and not followed the minimum setbacks from the tower lines in the plans as required under Rule 3(ii) of G.O.Ms.No.168 M.A., dated 07.04.2012. Therefore, by the said show-cause notice, the petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation within the stipulated time. Further, it was stated by the show-cause notice that the permission