THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21908 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioner seeks a mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 and 2 in not considering his representation, dated 22.04.2010, about the alleged illegal constructions undertaken by respondents 3 to 5 in plot No.14 covered by Survey No.1941 of Nellore Bit-I in an extent of 401.34 sq.meters without taking permission as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice, and consequently, direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to stop the construction work undertaken by respondents 3 to 5 in the aforesaid plot. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of plot No.13 situated at Thikkavarapuvari Layout, Gandhinagar, Nellore-4 and he has constructed a house bearing No.25-2-467 thereon. It is his grievance that the third respondent, who is the owner of plot No.14, is making constructions without taking any permission and in spite of the representation made by him on 22.04.2010, no steps are being taken by respondents 1 and 2. A counter-affidavit is filed by the first respondent - Commissioner, Nellore Municipal Corporation, Nellore. In the said counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated that one Smt. G.Devika, Wife of Suresh Babu, submitted building plan on 05.06.2009 to the answering respondent seeking permission for construction of residential apartment with stilt, ground, first, second and third floors duly paying relevant fees. It is further stated that permission was granted duly approving the plan vide B.A.No.548/09-G1, dated 20.06.2009. It is further stated that an extent of 94.69 sq.mts site in the second floor area was mortgaged in favour of Nellore Municipal Corporation vide registered deed, dated 22.06.2009 in lieu of surety for construction as per plan without deviation. It is also stated that constructions, which were made, so far are in accordance with the approved plan, there are no deviations for the present and there is no unauthorized construction. Similarly, a separate counter-affidavit is filed by respondents 4 and 5. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5, it is stated that the third respondent has purchased site in plot No.14 from its previous owner, by name, Podalakuru Masthanaiah for a sale consideration of Rs.6,60,000/- vide registered sale deed, dated 27.12.2006. It is further stated that the third respondent, who is the owner of the said property, executed registered General Power of Attorney in favour of Smt. Gopisetti Devika, Wife of Suresh Babu vide Document No.314/2008, dated 24.09.2008 and the said Smt. G.Devika is none other than the sister of the third respondent. It is also stated that the third respondent, who is owner of the property, and the answering respondents entered into a registered Joint Development Agreement cum General Power of Attorney and the answering respondents are making constructions as per the sanctioned plan. Although it is the case of the petitioner that constructions being undertaken by respondents 3 to 5 are illegal, from the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5, it is clear that there is permission granted by the competent authority for making constructions in the site in question vide permission proceedings bearing B.A.No.548/2009/G1, dated 20.06.2009, as such, allegation of the petitioner that the constructions are being made by respondents 3 to 5 without any permission, is incorrect and without any basis. Further, it is also stated in the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent that so far constructions made are in accordance with the sanctioned plan and there are no deviations. In view of the same, very allegation of the petitioner is false and that the alleged constructions are covered by valid permission granted by the competent authority. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the writ petition for grant of relief to the petitioner as prayed for. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 27th OCTOBER, 2010. kvni