Manamasi Sri Laxmi v. The Commissioner,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.8240 of 2011 ORDER:

Heard Mr.P.Gangarami Reddy for petitioner.

No representation for respondents.

The petitioner challenges Notice, dated 15.12.2010, as illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the mandatory procedure presc ribed under Section 228 of the A.P. Municipalities Act.

According to petitioner, through the notice impugned in the writ petition, the 1st respondent proposes to confirm a notic e said to have been issued on 07.12.2010. The petitioner can be accused of not filing reply, if she has received copy of notice dated 07.12.2010. Her definite case is that being the assignee and owner of the building, she has not received notice. Mr.Gangarami Reddy by referring to the stand taken in the counter affidavit submits that the respondents admit that notice was served on the husband of petitioner but not on the petitioner. He further contends that service of notice on husband of petitioner is not filed along with counter affidavit to presume knowledge of provisional notice, dated 07.12.2010. The issue canvassed by the petitioner is in a limited sphere. Instead of getting into whether the petitioner is heard before the

notice impugned in the writ petition is issued or not, to meet the ends of justice, the writ petition is disposed of by this order. (a) The interim order granted by this Court on 06.04.2011 is directed to be continued for a period of three months from today.

(b) The petitioner is given liberty to submit explanation to the notice dated 07.12.2010 by enclosing a copy of this order within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (c ) The 1st respondent is directed to pass orders within six weeks from the date of receipt of reply from petitioner.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

_____________ S. V. BHATT, J Dt: 21-03-2018 Prv

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.8240 of 2011 21-03-2018 Prv