IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20595 of 2008 Between: 1 B. Shyam Rao Pawar S/o. Late B.R. Pawar R/o. H.No.13-2-391/6/A, Puranapool, Hyderabad-500006. 2 A. Narayana S/o. Late A. Venkataiah R/o. H.NO.13-3-620, Ziaguda, Hyderabad-500006. 3 Mahender Singh S/o. Gajadhar Singh R/o. H.No.13-5-790/65/A, Kummarwadi, Caravan Sahu Post Office, Hyderabad-500006. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Chief Secretary to Government, General Administration Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, rep. by its Municipal Commissioner, Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector, Hyderabad 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not taking appropriate steps for removal of encroachments and illegal constructions made on public roads, lanes, footpaths. In fact, may representations have poured in from the residents of various localities to the oﬃces of the GHMC for the removal of encroachmentsby considering the undertakings given by the Chief Secretary to Government and Addl. Commissioner (Planning & Projects) and also the representations made by the residents may please be put into action immediately and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.DHANAMJAYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) This is a public interest litigation wherein the petitioners have submitted that certain encroachments have been made by some citizens on public streets and those encroachments have not been removed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 though they are duty bound to do so. When this petition was notiﬁed for hearing on 22-9-2008, the concerned learned Government Pleader was asked to take necessary instructions so as to ascertain as to whether there were encroachments, and if so, to instruct the concerned officers to do the needful. Today, the learned Government Pleader has submitted that necessary action has been taken by the concerned respondents for removal of the encroachments made on public streets. It has been further submitted that at certain places, the layouts have not been approved and, therefore, it is not certain whether the concerned persons have made encroachments. He has further submitted that needful is being done by the concerned authorities to ﬁnd out whether there are encroachments. He has shown some photographs to this Court and to the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners to substantiate his submission that most of the encroachments made on the public streets have been removed. In the aforestated circumstances, the grievance ventilated in the petition has been substantially redressed. Respondents 2 and 3 shall see that if there are any encroachments on the public streets, they shall do the needful for removal thereof at an early date. As speciﬁc details with regard to the encroachments have not been given in the petition, it would be open to the petitioners to give speciﬁc details with regard to encroachments to respondents 2 and 3, so that needful can be done by them. We are sure that respondents 2 and 3, through their oﬃcers, shall make periodical inspection of all the public streets and Govt. lands and if it is found that there is any encroachment, the same shall be removed immediately. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. _____________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ___________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 15th November, 2008. GRR