THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 13033 of 2007 25-06-2007 Between: Smt. M. Bhavani Petitioner And The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation rep., by its Deputy Commissioner, Uppal Municipality, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy district and four others. Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 13033 of 2007 Oral Order: The singular grievance of the petitioner herein, who is the owner and in possession of plot Nos. 226 (part) and 225 (part) in an extent of 222 square yards in survey Nos. 42 and 43 of Ramanthapur village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy district, is that the first respondent is not granting construction permission and not even entertaining her application for building permission on the ground that the land falls within the submergence of the Full Tank level of Pedda Cheruvu/Ramanthapur tank. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Polisetty Radha Krishna, the learned standing counsel for the first respondent. Similarly situated individuals filed W.P.No.91687 of 2007 similarly aggrieved as the petitioner. This Court by the judgment dated 27-04-2007 disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents therein to receive the application of the petitioners; to pass a receipt in token of having received the application for building permission and to take a decision and pass an order on the said application in accordance with law. It is stated by Sri Polisetty Radha Krishna, the learned standing counsel for the first respondent that other owners of lands allegedly within the Full Tank level of Pedda Cheruvu Tank/Ramanthapur Tank were denied building permission and had approached the Court. This Court allowed W.P.No.16397 of 2004 on 13-04-2005 directing the first respondent to consider grant of building permission subject to the applicants furnishing an undertaking that they would not latter claim any equities or seek compensation for the structures erected by them pursuant to the building permission. The learned standing counsel would submit that the building permission application of the petitioner would be considered by the first respondent and an appropriate decision in harmony with the decision taken in respect of the similarly circumstanced individuals would be taken and appropriate orders passed and duly communicated to the petitioner, on receiving her application for building permission. Recording the submissions made on behalf of the first respondent the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 13-04-2005 in W.P.No. 16397 of 2004. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 25-06-2007 pvks