Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Sweety Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs Municipal Corporation Of Hyderabad & ... on 25 June, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(4)ALD3, 1999(4)ALT115, AIR 1999 ANDHRA PRADESH 436, (1999) 4 ANDHLD 3 (1999) 4 ANDH LT 115, (1999) 4 ANDH LT 115
ORDER
1. The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of construction of commercial and residential complexes. One Sri Vishnuvardhan obtained building permission for construction of stilt plus three floors of residential building, vide Permit No.410/93, dated 19-5-1993 on his plot in Road No.l, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad admeasuring 654 Sq. Yards. Under an agreement of sale the petitioner purchased the said property and also acquired all the rights. It is alleged that the vendor of the petitioner commenced the construction within one year as per the building bye-laws and by the time the petitioner purchased the property, the stilt plus 3 floors were already completed. As per the Zoning Regulations, Ihe plot number of the petitioner, Road No.l, Banjara Hills fell in residential area. Therefore, Sri Vishnuvardhan had made a representation dated 28-8-1997 seeking conversion of land use from residential to commercial. The Government by letter No.19451/11/97-1, M.A., dated 8-9-1998 called upon the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad respondent No.l, to offer their comments on the application made by Sri Vishnuvardhan seeking relaxation of Zoning Regulations. The 1st respondent did not take any action on the letter of the Government.
2. The petitioner alleged that Sri Vishnuvardhan also submitted a revised building plan on 27-8-1997 and no action was taken on the said application. However, when the officials of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad threatened to demolish the structure already constructed, the vendor of the petitioner filed a suit in OS No.51417 of 1997 on the file of the IV Asst. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and an order of status quo was passed in IA No. 1648 of 1997. It is also averred that the status quo granted by Civil Court is still in force.
3. On 2-1-1998, the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad served a notice on one Sri Gopal Reddy who is the original owner of the land and the said notice was served under Sections 428 and 433 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act mentioning that the building permission granted to Sri Vishnuvardhan had lapsed under bye-law No.7 of the building bye-laws, that the construction was made in violation of the original approved plan and therefore the Municipal Corporation sought to demolish the structures. The petitioner's officers met the 1 st respondent and explained the position in vain. As there is a serious threat of demolition from the officers of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad the petitioner approached this Court and filed this writ petition. The petitioner sought for a declaration that the action of the respondents seeking to demolish the structures raised in plot bearing Municipal No.8-2-672, Road No.1, Banjara Hills without considering the representation dated 27-8-1997 is illegal and for further declaration that till the representation and the revised building plan are not considered, the Municipal Authorities are not entitled to take any coercive steps for demolition of the structure or otherwise.
4. This Court ordered notice before admission and granted interim stay of demolition by order dated 8-5-1998. The first respondent filed counter-affidavit stating that the petitioner has violated building bye-laws as well as the permission granted to Sri Vishnuvardhan. It is also alleged that there are number of deviations and the petitioners are making constructions in violation of the rules and regulations.
5. This Court is not inclined to go into these questions at this stage. These are matters to be considered by the appropriate authorities, because the representation made by the petitioner seeking change of the land use from residential to commercial has been admittedly pending with the Government from August, 1997. In fact, the Government have also called for remarks from the Municipal Corporation ofHyderabad, but no action has been taken. It is also relevant to mention that the Government of A,P. issued G.O. Ms. No. 15, M.A., Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Ml) Department, dated 15-1-1998 delegating the powers of granting relaxation of Zoning relaxation and has been communicated to all the special officers of Municipalities and Municipal Corporations. Therefore, nothing prevented the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, 1st respondent to dispose of the representation of the petitioner. Justice requires that when a citizen approaches appropriate authority for redressal and makes representation, minimum that can be done by the officers and authorities is to consider (he application accordingly and pass appropriate orders. The constitution confers such a right on all the citizens. The rule of law also requires that the citizens should know where they stand with regard to acquiring and enjoying their rights both personal and proprietory rights.
6. Therefore, I deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 27-8-1997 filed by the petitioner and also the revised building plan made by the petitioner or their vendor within a period of six weeks from today. The petitioners are also permitted to make any further representation if they so desire.
7. Sri C.V. Mohan Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that subsequent to this writ petition, the Government has formulated a building regulation scheme under G.O. Ms. No.419, dated 30-7-1998 and as required under the scheme, the petitioner made an application and also paid Rs. 10,10,000/- to the 3rd respondent and the same is also pending. It is also open to the 3rd respondent to consider the same in accordance with law.
8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Till the matter is finally settled by respondents, there shall be status quo as on date. No costs.