THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.20532 OF 2011 ORDER : The petitioner claims title to Plot No.10 situated in Sy.No.173/part in Sirimalle Nagar, Hyderguda Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Rangareddy District, having purchased the same under a Registered Sale Deed, dated 25.09.1998. The respondents 4 & 5 are the owners of Plot No.9 which is situated towards Western side of the petitioner’s plot. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents 1 to 3 in taking steps to prevent the respondents 4 and 5 from making the alleged unauthorized constructions in Plot No.9. In the affidavit filed in support of writ petition itself, it is pleaded that the respondents 4 & 5 filed O.S.No.13 of 2011 in the Court of the Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajendranagar, against the respondent No.1 – Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (for short, ‘the Corporation’) - for injunction and by order dated 11.03.2011 the Civil Court had granted temporary injunction restraining the Corporation from demolishing the suit schedule property. It is alleged that taking advantage of the said order, the respondents 4 & 5 had been proceeding with the alleged unauthorized constructions and that the Corporation was not evincing any interest to contest the proceedings in O.S.No.13 of 2011. Hence, the petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take immediate action as per law to prevent the respondents 4 and 5 from making alleged illegal constructions. As noticed above, the alleged unauthorized construction being made by the respondents 4 and 5 is the subject-matter of the proceedings pending before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction. Admittedly the temporary injunction granted by the Civil Court is operating against the respondent No.1. Hence, if aggrieved, it is for the petitioner to get herself impleaded as a party to the proceedings pending before the Civil Court and seek appropriate directions. For the aforesaid reasons, the present Writ Petition by way of parallel proceedings cannot be maintained. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to take appropriate steps as indicated above for redressal of her grievance, if any. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 25.07.2011 AMD/gbs