IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 5093 of 2009 Between: Kala Bhooma Sayanna, s/o. Gangaram, R/o. H.No. 2-1-90, Ward No. 21 Tilak Road, Korutla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Korutla Municipality, Korutla, Karimnagar District. 2 The District Collector, Karimnagar District. Karimnagar. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagitial Division, Jagitial, Karimnagar District. 4 The Tahsildar, Gollapally Mandal, Gollapally, Karimnagar District. 5 The Tata Indicom, KLK Estate, Fateh Maidan Road, Hyderabad. Rep by its Senior Manager 6 Alle. Parameshwar, s/o. Narsaiah, R/o. H.No. 2-1-78, Tilak Road, Korutla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent 1 to 4 in not taking any action against the respondent No.5's erection of 80 fee tower on the 2nd floor terrace of the respondent No. 6 house H.No. 2-1- 78, Tilak Road, Korutla proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District, in the midst of the residential locality, considering the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 7-2-2009, as arbitrary illegal null and void and violative of articles 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India consequently direct the respondents No. 1 to 4 to remove the illegally erected 80 fts tower by the respondent No. 5 on the 2nd floor of the terrace of the residential house H.No. 2-1-78, Tilak Road, Korutla Proper and Mandal, Karimnagar District of the respondent No. 6. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The petitioner asserts that the 6th respondent, who is adjacent owner, without obtaining necessary permission from the 1st respondent-Korutla Municipality, got erected a tower of 80 feet on the terrace of his building consisting of two floors. The petitioner states that the erection of tower may endanger the lives of the members of his family and cause lot of health hazards to the residents of Tilak Road, Korutla, and in the event the tower falls, it would damage the immovable properties of the residents of their locality. The petitioner states that he and his neighbours made representation dated 7.2.2009 to respondent Nos.1 to 4 requesting to take necessary action against respondent Nos.5 and 6 for removal of the illegally erected tower, and it is his grievance that so far, the official respondents neither passed any orders on their representation nor initiated any action against the unofficial respondents or for removal of the tower. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Korutla Municipality appearing for respondent No.1 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4. On 16.3.2009, this Court while ordering Notice Before Admission, granted time to the learned Standing Counsel for Korutla Municipality appearing for respondent No.1 for filing counter affidavit, but so far, no counter affidavit has been filed. However, having regard to the fact that the representation dated 07.02.2009 said to have been made by the petitioner and others is pending consideration before the official respondent, the counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1- Municipality, agreed to the disposal of the writ petition with the following directions: “The 1st respondent-Korutla Municipality is directed to consider the representation dated 07.02.2009 said to have been made by the petitioner and others, and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, after issuing notices to the unofficial respondents and considering their objections if any, and then take necessary action in accordance with the decision to be taken, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 8th April, 2009 bcj