Mrs Ponnamaneni Lakshmi v. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ direction or order in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in issuing Show cause notice dt October 24- 2008 bearing No.17313/W8-2/CX/CZ/2008 as being arbitrary illegal capricious without authority of law. Counsel for the Petitioner:MRS.CHANDANA MADALA Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT .KALPANA EKBOT E T he Court made t he following : ORDER T his writ pet it ion has been filed by Mrs. Poonnamaneni L akshmi assailing t he not ice issued under Sect ion 452 of t he Hyderabad Municipal Corporat ion Act , 1955. T he pet it ioner claims t o be t he owner of t he house bearing No.152, Venugopal Enclave, Road No.7, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. T he respondent issued a show cause not ice t o t he pet it ioner under Sect ion 452 of t he Hyderabad Municipal Corporat ion Act ,

1955. T he show cause not ice issued t o t he pet it ioner reads as hereunder:

Whereas, it is observed that you have erected the rolling shutter at Ground floor of premises NO.8-2-542, Road No.7, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, unauthorisedly for converting the residential usage into commercial purpose. You are therefore deemed to violated the provisions in Section 428 & 433 of HMC Act 1955 and also GOMs.NO.423, MA, dated 31.7.1998 and GO.Ms.NO.86, MA, dated 3.3.2006, Building Bye- laws and Zoning Regulations of 1981. You are hereby called upon to show cause in writing either yourself or your duly authorized agent within (3) days the service of this notice on you why the building or such portion of the building or work of such portion of the work mentioned above, should not be removed/altered or amended/pulled down. Your attention is invited to Section 452(2) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and if you fail to show cause in the manner required above to the Commissioner or any other Officer authorized by him in this behalf, within the said building or such stipulated portion/operations of the building or work or such portion/portions of the work as is found plan shall be contrary to the sanctioned removed/altered or amended/pulled down or cause to remove/ altered or amended/pulled down by the Commissioner on the presumption to show or no that you have no cause explanation to offer and the expenses there if shall be recovered from you.

When the writ petition came up for admission, Smt Kalpana Ekbote, learned standing counsel of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation received notice on behalf of the respondent.

Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned standing counsel of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation appearing on behalf of the respondent. Since the notice under challenge in this writ petition is only a show cause notice, the petitioner is at liberty to submit his explanation to the show cause notice and invite final orders thereon. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit explanation to the show cause notice and thereupon the respondent shall pass appropriate orders within a period of 15 days. There shall be status quo existing as on this day with regard to the constructions made by the petitioner till the objections to the notice under Section 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 are disposed of. No costs. ___________ 30-10-2008