AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Sri Sreemannarayana Vattikuti, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 & 3.
Challenging the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in demolishing semi constructed residential building, constructed on the property admeasuring 333.3 square yards or 278.663 square metres, bearing Plot No.202 in H.P. Nagar Layout, covered by L.P. No.23/91, situated at Bakkannapalem Village, Visakhapatnam, the instant writ petition has been filed.
The petitioner claims to have purchased the subject land from one M/s. Srinivasa Infra. The property is covered by VUDA layout permission in L.P. No.23/91. The petitioner after obtaining building permission has commenced construction activity. However, the respondents have forcibly entered and started demolishing the structure without issuing any notice. Thus the petitioner approached this Court by a way of an instant Writ Petition.
When the matter has been taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 3 has placed before the Court a copy of the instructions received by him in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that petitioner has submitted a Building Plan Application proposing construction of G + 1 floors in respect of Plot No.202 of Bakkannapalem Village, Madhurawada.
The subject site was subsequently inspected and verified on the ground with reference to the documents submitted, the survey particulars, and the approved VUDA Layout Plan. Upon such verification, it was observed that the plots in the said approved layout are numbered as Plot Nos.1 to 198. However, the subject plot is neither shown nor found in the approved VUDA Layout Plan.
Further, upon correlating the subject site with the approved VUDA Layout Plan, it was observed that the proposed site falls within the area earmarked as Open Space in the said approved layout. Therefore, as the subject site does not correspond to any approved residential plot in L.P. No.23/91, the respondents have initiated action for demolition.
Considered the submissions.
The fact remains that respondents did not issue any notice before taking up the coercive measures for demolition of the structure. Having regard to the above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent authorities that, if any action is proposed against the petitioner, the same shall be taken only after following due process of law. No coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner without following due process of law.
With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.