THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.25404 of 2010 Date: 29.03.2011 Between: A. Shanker … Petitioner and The Adilabad Municipality, Rep.by its Commissioner, Adilabad and another. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.25404 of 2010 ORDER : Heard Sri K. Venumadhav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Smt. Shanthi Neelam, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-Adilabad Municipality and with the consent of both the counsel, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the representation dated 28.9.2010 said to have been submitted by the petitioner with regard to the alleged illegal construction undertaken by the 2nd respondent as arbitrary and illegal and for a consequential direction to take necessary action to cancel the construction permission granted in favour of the 2nd respondent. 3. The petitioner claims to be the owner of premises bearing house No.7-1-8/82/3, Bhokthapur, Adilabad District. It is stated that there is an approach way to his house from the main road. The 2nd respondent, who is said to be in occupation of a small extent situated towards the southern side of the said approach way, obtained permission for construction of a house covering the said approach way. The petitioner, therefore, filed the present writ petition contending that the 2nd respondent obtained permission by suppressing the material fact that there is a approach way to his house from the main road and the 1st respondent granted permission even without verifying the title of the 2nd respondent in respect of the said premises. 4. The 1st respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that the permission was granted only after verification and inspection of the site. It is stated that the plot area is less than 100 square meters and hence as per the orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.569, dated 23.8.2008, the front set back is maintained at the site according to the permission given and on other sides, the set backs are not required. It is also stated that the petitioner failed to submit any document in support of his case and, therefore, no action can be taken for cancellation of the construction permission granted in favour of the 2nd respondent. 5. From the above, it could be seen that the petitioner has not filed any material either before the 1st respondent or before this Court to show that there is a pathway leading to his house from the main road. In the absence of any material, a mere statement of the petitioner in that regard cannot be accepted. The 2nd respondent has undertaken the construction only after obtaining necessary permission from the 1st respondent in accordance with the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.569, dated 23.8.2008. Therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent civil Court to establish his right, if any, over the pathway. No order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 29.03.2011. Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.25404 of 2010 29.03.2011 (Msr)