:: ORDER ::

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of 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 action of the respondent No.2 and his staff in stopping the construction made by the petitioner in plot No.19, admeasuring 127.50 Sq.yards in Sy.Nos.1505 and 1508 of Sanjeevaiah Nagar, Sircilla Town, Karimnagar District, without any notice or proceedings as required under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principals of natural justice, violative of the provisions of the AP Municipalities Act and violative of Articles 14, 300-A of the Constitution of India and to pass...”

2. Heard Sri T. Surya Satish, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Municipality, appearing for respondent Nos.2. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been granted building permission by respondent No.2 vide proceedings in file No.G1/897/2015 and permit No.128/2015 dated 19.11.2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the petitioner is proceeding with the construction in accordance with the sanctioned plan, respondent No.2 is interfering with the same. Aggrieved by the such interference, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Estates International Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Assam¹(2010) 2 SCC 27 has laid down the law that once valid permission has been granted, the authorities cannot interfere with the construction so long as it is carried out strictly in accordance with the sanctioned plan. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also held that the powers of statuary authorities emanate only from the statute and any action in contravention to statuary provisions is impermissible.

5. Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would contend that there is no interference on the part of the respondent authorities. However, it is submitted that respondent No.2 is at liberty to inspect the construction, and if there are any deviations from the sanctioned plan, initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

6. In that view of the matter, the respondent No.2 is directed not to interfere with the construction activity, as long as it is being carried out in accordance with the sanctioned plan. However, respondent No.2 is at liberty to inspect the constructions but shall not interfere with the ongoing work, except strictly in accordance with law, except in case of proven deviation from the sanctioned plan, as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Priyanka Estates International Pvt. Ltd’s case (supra).

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.