IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 22278 of 2008 Between: Smt. D. Radha, W/o. Sreenivasula Reddy, r/o. D.No. 24-2-656, Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its District Collector, Nellore, Nellore District. 2. The Nellore Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Nellore, Nellore District. 3. The Town Planning Officer, The Municipal Corporation, Nellore, Nellore District. 4. Ponnala Venkatrami Reddy, Father's Name, not known to the petitioner, Door No. 24-2/433, Ward No. 24, Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore. 5. D. Narayanamma, Husband's name not known to the petitioner, Door No. 24/2/655, Ward No. 24, Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore. 6. M.R. Patel, Fathers name not known to the petitioner, Door No. 24/2/657, Ward No. 24, Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore. 7. P. Keerthi, D/o. Ravindra Reddy, Door No. 24/2/654, Ward No. 24, Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore. 8. D. Purushotham, S/o. Father's Name not known to the petitioner, Ward No. 24, Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore. 9. R. Nagendra Singh, S/o. Father's name not known to the petitioner, Sriya Residency Flat Owners, Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents No. 1 to 3 in not taking effective steps to remove the encroachments found and ordered to be removed through the notices, dated 30-6-2007 as arbitrary, illegal, abdication of the statutory duty cast on them and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents Nos.1 and 3 to take effective steps to remove the encroachments found and ordered to be removed through the notices, dated 30-6-2007 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.R.REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: According to the petitioner, she is a permanent resident of Saraswathi Nagar and the residents of the said locality are using the road, which is 40 feet in width, connecting to GNT road for the ingress and egress. The respondents 4 to 9, according to the petitioner, have occupied certain portion of the internal roads and raised illegal construction over the same obstructing free flow of traffic and causing so much of inconvenience to the residents of Saraswathi Nagar. In that view of the matter, the petitioner and other residents of Saraswathi Nagar, made representation to the official respondents who are respondents 1 to 3, about the said illegal construction and the authorities have issued notice to the so called encroachers including the unofficial respondents. But so far no action has been initiated. Hence, they again approached the Authorities and submitted another representation dated 26.09.2008, but in vain. Hence, she approached this Court and filed the present writ petition complaining inaction on the part of the official respondents. Heard Mr. A.Sridhar, learned Standing Counsel for the Nellore Municipal Corporation and Mr. P.Sridhar Reddy, appearing for the respondents 4 to 6. Whether the respondents 4 to 6 have raised any illegal construction or not, is not to be decided by this court, as representations have already been given by the petitioner and other residents of Saraswathi Nagar. As it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that already notices have been issued under Sec. 402 and 406 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the next step would be remove the said unauthorized construction. But, however, Mr. P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 to 6 denied the same and submitted that the respondents are not aware of any such notice and even if such notice is issued, they are not in receipt of the same. In that view of the matter, the official respondents particularly respondent No.2 is hereby directed to hold an enquiry into the allegations made by the petitioner after hearing the unofficial respondents and thereafter take necessary action in accordance with law. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada December 1, 2008 Copy within three days. //BO// MAS