Smt. R.Parvathamma, v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.14521 of 2015 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents 2 and 3 and their subordinates in trying to demolish the petitioner's house bearing No.2-10-294/1, Waddepally, Hanamkonda, Warangal District, without following due procedure, as illegal and arbitrary. Petitioner claims to have constructed the subject house, after obtaining due permission from the 3rd respondent Corporation, in the land purchased by her through registered sale deed dated 10.04.2000. It is her grievance that without issuing any notice, the authorities of the 3rd respondent Corporation have made markings on the compound wall of her house on 06.05.2015 and under the guise of survey, they are threatening to demolish her house property. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue (TG) for respondents 1 and 2 and learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent Corporation.

Learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent Corporation produced a copy of the letter dated 04.09.2014 addressed by the Tahsildar, Hanamkonda, to the Commissioner of the 3rd respondent Corporation, along with the statement showing the encroachments made on Government nala land in Waddepally Village, and stated that as per the said statement, the petitioner has encroached some site belonging to Government nala land and raised compound wall therein and the said compound wall was demolished. He further stated that the respondent authorities are not taking any steps to demolish the house of the petitioner. A perusal of the said letter and statement of the Tahsildar, Hanamkonda, reveals that only the compound wall of the petitioner's house was shown as an encroachment, but not the house property. Even according to the submission of the

learned Standing Counsel, only the said compound wall was demolished and the respondent authorities are not taking any steps to demolish the house of the petitioner. Thus, the allegation of the petitioner that the respondent authorities are trying to demolish her house property is only a mere apprehension without any basis and, as such, the question of granting any relief in this writ petition does not arise. Accordingly, placing on record the submission of the learned Standing Counsel that the respondent authorities are not taking any steps for demolition of the petitioner's house, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 14th May, 2015 IBL/VV