JUDGMENT 1. This Writ Petition for a mandamus is filed to declare the action of 4th respondent Nandigama Nagara Panchayat in making an attempt to demolish the shop rooms and house of the petitioner for the purpose of widening the road without acquiring the said property as per law and without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently, sought direction to the respondents not to demolish the property in question. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondents 1 and 3; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for 2nd respondent; and Sri M. Manohar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, for 4th respondent. 3. The petitioner claims to be absolute owner of the shop rooms and house bearing D.No.10-1 in an extent of 1361/2 sq. yards in R.S.No.662/2 situate in Nandigama Nagara Panchayat along with her husband by name Suresh. It is stated that the 4th respondent Nandigama Nagara Panchayat is now making an effort to demolish the said shop rooms and house of the petitioner and her husband for the purpose of widening the C.M. Road without acquiring the said property according to law and without following due process of law. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing this Writ Petition seeking the aforesaid reliefs. 4. Sri M.Manohar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent, would submit that the said property is required for public purpose of widening the C.M. Road and the Commissioner of Nandigama Nagara Panchayat has already issued a circular dated 03.11.2021 seeking the consent of the owners of the property for the purpose of acquiring the same to widen the road and the said process is pending at present. He would further submit that the 4th respondent Nagara Panchayat would follow the due process of law to acquire the said property and then proceed with the work of widening the road. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner is the absolute owner of the shop rooms and house in question. The said fact is not disputed before this Court by the respondents. It is also a fact that the 4th respondent Nagara Panchayat is now taking up the process of widening the C.M. Road. It requires the property of the petitioner along with the property of some other persons for the purpose of widening the said road. The said fact is not disputed before this Court by the respondents. It is also a fact that the 4th respondent Nagara Panchayat is now taking up the process of widening the C.M. Road. It requires the property of the petitioner along with the property of some other persons for the purpose of widening the said road. Although the circular dated 03.11.2021 was issued seeking consent of the owners of the said property to acquire the said land for public purpose of widening the road, the said process is still pending. The property of the petitioner is not yet acquired by the 4th respondent Nagara Panchayat by initiating any lawful proceedings to that effect. Therefore, the 4th respondent Nagara Panchayat cannot initiate any steps to demolish the house or shop rooms of the petitioner without acquiring the said property lawfully. This Court in the case of Dr.Tayi Venkata Subba Rao v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsapur, 2015 (1) ALT 699 clearly held that municipal authorities shall not highhandedly resort to demolish the private properties for road widening without the consent of owners and without acquiring the said land and paying compensation under the provisions of the Municipalities Act. The said analogy squarely applies to the present facts of the case. 6. As already noticed supra, only consent of the petitioner is sought for acquiring the house and shop rooms. The same are not yet acquired by paying any compensation to the petitioner. Therefore, the respondents cannot resort to any illegal act of demolishing the shop rooms and house of the petitioner without following the due process of law. 7. So, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to follow the due process of law. Till due process of law is followed and the property of the petitioner is lawfully acquired, the respondents are directed not to demolish the house and shop rooms of the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall also stand closed.