APHC010820162015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32102/2015 Between: Y.vineeta Kiran, Hyd ...PETITIONER AND Commissioner Gvmc Visakhapatnam 2 Ot and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y VIVEKANANDA SWAMY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) 2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…Issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not granting permission for completing the damaged repairs and reconstruction of work in terms of the application dated 23/05/2015 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to grant building permission in premises no.15-5- 4/8 (4th floor permission), Venkateshwara Nagar, Maharanipeta, Vishakapatnam, A.P., as per the application dated 23-05-2015 and to pass…” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner purchased the house property situated in Door No.15-5-4/8, Venkateswara Nagar, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam, from its original owner one Smt. Khairunnisa Begum through registered sale deed dated 14.07.2008. Initially, the petitioner is the owner of the west side portion of the 2nd floor and the complete 3rd and 4th floors of the subject property. Thereafter, at the time of the said purchase, the 4th floor of the said property is semi constructed to an extent of 200Sft and the remaining 860 Sft has remained un-constructed. 3. As such, for completion of the same, the petitioner submitted an application dated 31.12.2007, seeking regularization of the construction of the 4th floor. On verification of the records, the respondent authorities have regularized the said construction vide proceedings No.BPS.No.02612, Zone III, Ward No.20, dated 06.12.2010. Basing on the said regularization proceedings dated 06.12.2010, the petitioner had completed the remaining construction and to which the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation had conducted an inspection and issued the Occupancy Certificate to the petitioner. 4. While so, due to the havoc of HUD-HUD Cyclone at Visakhapatnam, the 4th floor of the said house of the petitioner was damaged and for reconstructing the same, the petitioner had once again submitted an application dated 23.05.2015, seeking permission to the respondent authorities. But, no action was taken till so far by the respondents. Aggrieved by the said inaction of the respondent authorities, the present writ petition is filed. 5. Heard Sri Y.Vivekananda Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondent No.3 and perused the material available on record. 6. Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 & 2 has furnished a copy of instructions dated 05.01.2025, issued by the TDO & ACP-IV i/c, wherein it is stated that the petitioner had obtained permission for construction of G+2 in the year 1997 vide B.A.No.1784/97/ACP-II, dated 08.12.1997 and later the same was regularized in the year 1988 vide BRS 1463/98/ACP-I, dated 13.10.1999 for G+3 upper floors bearing D.No.15-5-4, Venkateswara Nagar, Maharanipeta. Thereafter, the petitioner had unauthorizedly constructed 4th floor over the existing G+3 floors and later the same was regularized vide proceedings No.BPS.No.02612, Zone III, Ward No.20, dated 06.12.2010 for 1060 Sft. 7. Subsequently, after the HUD-HUD Havoc, the remaining flat owners of the said building had lodged a complaint dated 24.11.2014, stating that the subject building is 18 years old and the petitioner herein is constructing the 4th floor without prior permission from the respondent-office. Basing on the said complaint dated 24.11.2014; the staff of the respondent-office had inspected the building and after verifying the records, they orally instructed the petitioner to stop the construction works. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted a representation to the office seeking fresh permission for construction of the 4th floor. But the same is not yet been granted by the respondent-office and the petitioner had also not proceeded with the further construction. 8. On a perusal of the instructions submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, it can be understood that basing on the complaint dated 24.11.2010, submitted by the remaining flat owners of the subject building, the respondent- office had inspected the building premises and directed the petitioner to stop the construction works. Thereafter, though the petitioner had submitted an application dated 23.05.2015, seeking fresh permission for construction of the 4th floor, the same is still pending for consideration before the respondents. 9. In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent No.1 to take appropriate action on the representation dated 23.05.2015 made by the petitioner within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order in accordance with law. 10. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 09.01.2025 SRT 262 THE HONOURABLE SMT.JUSTICE V.SUJATHA W.P.No.32102 of 2015 Date: 09.01.2025 SRT