IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 19389 of 2007 Between: Syed Fayaz S/o.Syed Basha R/o.D.No.21/81, Badesaheb Veedhi, Janda Veedhi, Nellore, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Municipal Corporation of Nellore, Nellore District, Rep. by its Commissioner. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not considering the petitioner's representation dt. 9.2.2007 as wholly illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Municipal corporation Act, and consequently direct the respondent to consider and take action in accordance with law in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondent: SRI A.SRIDHAR The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19389 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not considering the petitioner’s representation, dated 09.02.2007, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act. The petitioner claims to be the owner of a residential site admeasuring 120 sq. yards in Sy.No.342, Ward No.20 situated within the limits of Municipal Corporation of Nellore, having purchased the same under registered sale deeds dated 31.01.2007 and 16.01.2007. It is his case that abutting his property, there is a 40 feet road and there are encroachments into the said 40 feet road, by which the road width was reduced to 30 feet. The grievance of the petitioner is that he submitted a representation on 09.02.2007 to the respondent bringing to his notice the said encroachments over the Municipal road and to take appropriate action by removing the same, but the respondent so far has not taken any action thereon. In the counter affidavit filed by the Commissioner of the respondent Corporation, it is stated that there are no encroachments on the master plan road, as alleged by the petitioner. Learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent submits that pursuant to the representation dated 09.02.2007 submitted by the petitioner, they verified the same and found no encroachments on the master plan road, as alleged by the petitioner. He also submits that though the complaint is made against Sk.Mahaboob Basha, he is not made a party respondent in the writ petition. Though the counter affidavit is filed as early as in the month of November, 2007, stating that there are no encroachments in the master plan road, as alleged by the petitioner, the petitioner has not filed any reply affidavit rebutting the same. In view of the counter averments that pursuant to the representation dated 09.02.2007 submitted by the petitioner, the respondent has verified the allegations with regard to the encroachment on the master plan road and found that there are no such encroachments, it cannot be said that the respondent has not acted upon the said representation of the petitioner, and as such there are no merits in the writ petition and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J 28.04.2009 v v