M/S Kalyan Constructions Pvt., Ltd.. v. The Government Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 21892 of 2016 ORDER :

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Lakshmi Narayana Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. At their request, the Writ Petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

2. The prayer of the petitioner in this case is as under: "...to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the building approval plan submitted by the petitioner in B.A. No.13402/2015, ACP-II/G1, dated 26.8.2015, though elapsed more than 10 months, contrary to the provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the application of the petitioner forthwith and to pass.."

3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though it submitted building plan on 26.08.2015 for approval, the same is not being considered by respondents 2 and 3. However, the Endorsement in B.A. No.13402/2015/ACPII/G1, dated __.09.2015 made by the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation shows that the application made by the petitioner was returned as it was not submitted along with link documents. But, in the

affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it has been specifically stated by the petitioner that on receipt of the aforesaid Endorsement, petitioner once again submitted the plan along with link documents on 02.10.2015 for fresh consideration, but no action has been taken so far. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 would submit that the petitioner has not filed any proof to show that it had submitted any link documents. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will submit a copy of the link documents again, upon which the respondents 2 and 3 may be directed to consider the same in accordance with law for sanction of the building plan.

4. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit link documents as called for in the Endorsement in B.A. No.13402/2015/ACP-II/G1, dated __.09.2015 by respondent No.2, within a period of one week from today, in which event, respondents 2 and 3 shall consider sanction of the building plan in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in the Writ Petition shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

______________________ C.PRAVEEN KUMAR, J 08.07.2016

DRK THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR W.P.No.21892 of 2016

08.07.2016