HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W. P. No. 13425 of 2009 THURSDAY THE 20th DAY OF AUGUST, 2009 Between Dr. S.Srinivas .. Petitioner And Govt. of A.P. And two others .Respondents O R D E R:- The main grievance of the writ petitioner is that even though he made representation dated 05.09.2008 to the 2nd respondent alleging that the 3rd respondent, who is his neighbour, has constructed the house without leaving set backs and compound wall by encroaching the public road, thereby obstructing the ventilation to his house, but the 2nd respondent has neither considered the representation nor passed any orders thereon nor initiated any action against the 3rd respondent for his illegal constructions. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, appearing for the 2nd respondent. Since the representation dated 05.09.2008 said to have been made by the petitioner complaining about the alleged illegal constructions said to have been made by the 3rd respondent, is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent, both the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Corporation agreed to the disposal of the writ petition with the following directions: “The 2nd respondent-Corporation is directed to consider the representation dated 05.09.2008 said to have been made by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, expeditiously, after issuing notice to the 3rd respondent, and take necessary action in accordance with the decision to be taken.” Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 20th August, 2008 bcj