##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY , THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN

:PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.N.No 22065 of 2013

Between:-

Laxman Agarwal S/o Late Ramprasad Agarwal .....Petitioner

AND

1.The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department

Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2.The Kothagudem Municipality Kothagudem,, rep. by its Commissioner

3.The Town Planning Officer, Kothagudem Municipality.

4.The Pathuri Venkata Subramanyam S/o Panduranga Vittal, Occ: Pathuri Brother Investments Consultants, R/o 9-4-2/2,

Opposite to Prakasam Stadium Madura Basthi, Kothagudem Town, Khammam District. .....Respondents.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not stopping, demolishing the illegal construction made by 4th respondent in 2nd floor over the property bearing Door No.9-4-1/3, shopping complex, Sy.No.141, situated at Madura Basthi, Opposite to Prakasam Stadium, Kothagudem Town, Khammam District in not invoking the powers under the provisions of Section 228 of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1964, as illegal, arbitrary and null and void and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 demolishing the illegal construction made by 4th respondent in 2nd floor over the property bearing Door No.9-4-1/3, shopping complex, Sy.No.141, situated at Madura Basthi, Opposite to Prakasam Stadium, Kothagudem Town, Khammam District by invoking the powers under the provisions of Section 228 of the A.P. Municipalities Act,

1964.

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI S. MADAN MOHAN RAO, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Govt. Pleader for Municipal Administration on behalf of respondent No.1 and Ms Shanti Neelam-SC on behalf of

respondent Nos.2 & 3, the Court made the following ORDER :-

“Ms. Shanti Neelam, learned Standing Counsel accepts Notice on behalf of the 2^nd respondent Kothagudem Municipality and seeks time

to secure instructions.

Call after two weeks.

##PAGE2##

The 4th respondent, if is carrying on any constructions contrary to the approved building plan or without obtaining any such building plan or without obtaining any such building plan, Respondents 2 and 3 shall take all necessary steps to prevent any such illegal

construction from being made.”

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Contd..2…

- 2 -

To

1.The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development

Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2.The Commissioner, Kothagudem Municipality Kothagudem, Khammam District.

3.The Town Planning Officer, Kothagudem Municipality, Khammam District.

4.The Pathuri Venkata Subramanyam S/o Panduranga Vittal, Occ: Pathuri Brother Investments Consultants, R/o 9-4-2/2,

Opposite to Prakasam Stadium Madura Basthi, Kothagudem Town, Khammam District.

5.Two Cs to the G.P. for Municipal Administration, High Court of A.P., Hyd(OUT)

6.One CC to Sri S. Madan Mohan Rao, Advocate(OPUC)

7.One spare copy.

TKK

##PAGE3##

HIGH COURT

NRR.J

DT.26-07-2013.

##PAGE4##

ORDER

W.P.No. 22065 of 2013

INTERIM DIRECTION

DRAFTED BY TKK DT.26-07-2013.

HIGH COURT

NRR.J

##PAGE5##

DT.26-07-2013.

Note :- Call after two weeks.

ORDER

W.P.No. 22065 of 2013

INTERIM DIRECTION

Click Here to Read the rest of this document