IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.13761 of 1999 Between: ..... PETITIONER AND .....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 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.LAKSHMANA SARMA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ } THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.13761 of 1999 O R D E R: None appears on either side. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of an extent of Ac.5.51 cents in R.S.No.44/1 of Rajahmundry and he sold Ac.0.98 cents long ago to M/s.Engineers & Traders and delivered possession and also sold another Ac.1.25 cents to one M.Gangireddy and now the petitioner is in possession of Ac.3.28 cents. It is stated that he leased out an extent of Ac.2.00 to one K.Ramarao under registered deed and he has failed to vacate the same even after the expiry of lease period and therefore he filed a suit for eviction of tenant in O.S.1167/1974 which was ended into compromise, but as per the compromise decree, the tenant has not vacated land and therefore, E.P.6/85 was filed. While so, the respondent Corporation, Rajamundry issued a notification in ROC.2245/95-G!, dated 20.03.1999 notifying that the land in Sy.No.44/1 (P) is under the encroachment of residents of Rajivgandhinagar, and with a view to improve the welfare and provide minimum amenities, the Municipal Corporation, Rajamundry resolved, vide resolution No.539, dated 19.03.1999, to acquire the said land under Sec.3 (2) A.P.Slum Improvement Act. Accordingly, the owners are requested to file their objections in writing. Questioning the said notification, the writ petition has been filed, stating that the area is purely commercial area, but not residential area and the workers working in the quarries made temporary arrangements for their residence by constructing thatched sheds, and though the petitioner made a representation, the same has not been considered and disposed of. No copy of the representation has been enclosed along with the writ petition. It is nowhere stated what is the date of filing of the representation. Having regard to the facts of the case, the representation if any said to have been made and still pending with the respondent, the same may be considered and disposed of, in accordance with law. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 20.06.2008 Dsr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 2.2CCs to 3.2CD copies