HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.29038 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the action of the respondents 1 and 3 in not considering the representation dated 24.10.2011 of the petitioner, as illegal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 3. 3. It is stated that the petitioner is the absolute owner of shop, portion of house property bearing Door Nos.21-1-289; 21-1-288/1; 21-1-288/2; and 21-1-288/3, admeasuring 52.50 sq. yards situated at Lad Bazaar, Hyderabad, having purchased the same by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 26.4.2011, and since then he has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. As respondents 4 and 5 tried to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s property, he has filed a suit in O.S.No.2230 of 2011 on the file of the VIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad restraining the respondents 4 and 5 from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the said property and the court below has granted interim order in I.A.No.456 of 2011 dated 14.9.2011, that respondents 4 and 5 are proceeding with the illegal construction and on coming to know about the said illegal constructions, the petitioner has got issued a telegraphic notice on 24.10.2011 to the official respondents 1 to 3, but the official respondents failed to take any action against respondents 4 and 5. Hence he filed the present writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that respondents 4 and 5 are trying to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s property and, therefore, respondents 1 to 3 have to take an appropriate decision on the representation dated 24.10.2011 of the petitioner, in accordance with rules and regulations of the corporation and hence he prays to allow the writ petition. 5. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 to 3 contended that the appropriate decision would be taken on the representation dated 24.10.2011 of the petitioner and prays to dismiss the writ petition. 6. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 4 and 5 are trying to interfere with his possession and enjoyment of the property and that inspite of petitioner submitting representation dated 24.10.2011 to the respondents 1 to 3 with regard to the interference of the respondents 4 and 5 with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property, they have not taken any action. Therefore, it is for the respondents 1 to 3 to take an appropriate decision as regards the interference by the respondents 4 and 5 with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioner. 7. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 to 3 to take an appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioner as regards the interference by the respondents 4 and 5 with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioner, after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU,J. 29.10.2011, Gk. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.29038 OF 2011 Date:29.10.2011 Gk.