M/S. S L C Projects Pvt.Ltd., vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2094 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

             WRIT PETITION NO. 9606 OF 2023

JUDGMENT:-

1)    Heard Sri. V.V. Ravi Prasad, learned Counsel for the

Petitioner and Sri. K. Madhava Reddy, learned Standing

Counsel for Respondent No. 2 - the Commissioner, Greater

Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation ['G.V.M.C.'] and its

authority - the 3rd Respondent.

2) For the Order proposed to be passed, notice to the 4th

Respondent is dispensed with.

3) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that, the

4th Respondent raised building construction on the land

towards northern side of the Petitioner's house after

obtaining the building permission, but now he is making

additions/alterations in violation of the building Rules. The

Petitioner has submitted representations to the 2nd

Respondent on 31.03.2023, 01.04.2023 and 07.04.2023,

bringing it to the notice of the Corporation, but till date no

action has been taken. He further submits that, for making

of the additions/alternations, there is no building

permission obtained by the 4th Respondent.

4) Sri. K. Madhava Reddy, submits that once the

Petitioner has approached the authorities raising the same

grievance as in the Writ Petition, the authorities will

certainly consider the grievance of the Petitioner and pass

appropriate orders on his representations, with due

opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and the

Respondent No. 4.

5) In view of the aforesaid, as the Petitioner has already

approached the authorities for redressal of the same

grievance, it is considered appropriate, at the first instance,

to direct the 2nd Respondent - the Commissioner,

G.V.M.C., to consider the Petitioner's representations and

pass appropriate order thereon in accordance with law,

with due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner as also to

the 4th Respondent, within a period of four [04] weeks from

the date the copy of this order is served to him by the

Petitioner and it is so directed.

6) It is further provided that if it is found by 2nd

Respondent, prima facie, that the construction/addition is

being made contrary to the building Rules even till disposal

of the representations, it shall be open to Respondent No.2

to pass appropriate 'stop work' order till final decision is

taken, as aforesaid.

7) With the above directions, the writ petition is

disposed off.

No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any

pending, shall also stand closed.

________________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J Date: 19.04.2023 Note:

Issued C.C. by tomorrow.

B/o.

SM/KLNS...

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

WRIT PETITION NO. 9606 OF 2023

Date: 19.04.2023

SM/KLNS