The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.14796 of 2011 Dated 7th June, 2011 Between: Dr.R.Madhava Reddy …Petitioner and Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, and 2 others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Ch.Ramesh Babu Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: Ms.V.Jayasree, for Mr.C.Damodar Reddy, SC for GHMC Counsel for respondent No3: ----- The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2, to take necessary action against respondent No.3, who is trying to encroach 30 feet wide road in between the house plots of the petitioner and respondent No.3, by considering the petitioner’s representations, dated 13-04-2011 and 20-04-2011, and representation, dated 15-04-2011, of the Vivekananda Colony Residential Association, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner averred in his affidavit that his wife has purchased plot No.3 admeasuring 1000.61 square yards in Survey No.30 part in Ward No.3, Block No.9 of Mansoorabad Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District; that respondent No.3 purchased plot No.43 admeasuring 300 square yards in the same survey, ward and block numbers and; that when respondent No.3 sought to encroach upon the road abutting the petitioner’s house plot in the year 2005, the latter objected to the same. It is further averred that respondent No.3 filed O.S.No.2100 of 2005 in the Court of the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, which, after contest by the petitioner, was dismissed by judgment and decree, dated 01-11-2010, and that A.S.No.340 of 2010, filed by respondent No.3 against the said judgment and decree, is pending in the Court of the learned District Judge, Ranga Reddy District. It is further averred that when respondent No.3 sought to block the road by way of encroachment, the petitioner submitted representation, dated 13-04-2011, to respondent No.1 requesting him to prevent respondent No.3 from doing so and that on 15-04-2011, a similar representation was made by the Vivekananda Colony Residential Association to respondent No.2. The petitioner claimed that he has made another representation on 20-04- 2011 to respondent No.2 for the same purpose and with a request not to accord permission to respondent No.3 for raising construction over the public road, which is described, by respondent No.3, as plot No.43. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said representations have not yielded any response from respondent Nos.1 and 2. At the hearing, Miss.V.Jayasree, learned Counsel representing Sri C.Damodar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation representing respondent Nos.1 and 2 stated that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are prepared to consider the representations of the petitioner for taking action against respondent No.3. Having regard to the aforesaid submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of, without going into the correctness or otherwise of the pleas of the petitioner, with a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to dispose of the petitioner’s representations and take appropriate action, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of being heard to respondent No.3, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.17797 of 2011, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is dismissed as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dated 7th June, 2011 lur