IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 1369 of 2005 Between: P.Chandra Reddy, s/o late P.Hanmanthu, r/o Plot No.3, H.No.8-152, New Maithripuram Colony, Jillelguda Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Rangareddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Gram Panchayat, Jillelguda Gram Panchayat, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, rep., by its Executive Officer. 2 P.Srinivas, s/o Badraiah, r/o Plot No.4/A, H.No.8-153, New Maithripuram Colony, Jillelguda Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Rangareddy District. 3 M.Ramalingeshwar Rao, s/o M.V.Narayan Rao, r/o Plot No.4/B, H.No.8-154, New Maithripuram Colony, Jillelguda Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Rangareddy District. .....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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or writs, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in not acting upon the Application/complaints dt.11-12-2004 and subsequent applications dt.16-12-2004 and 27-01-2005 made by the petitioner regarding deviations in construction of building by 2nd and 3rd respondents at Plot No.4/A and 4/B respectively in Sy.No.26 part and 26/A part, situated at Jillelguda Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Rangareddy District as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and consequently direct the respondent No.1 to forthwith act upon the Applications/complaints made by the petitioner regarding illegal constructions made by the 2nd and 3rd respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VENKAT REDDY THIPPARTHI Counsel for Respondent No.1: SMT.JYOTHI ESWAR GOGINENI Counsel for Respondents 2 and3: -- The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER: The only grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the first respondent-Gram Panchayat failed to consider the complaint made by him in his representation dated 11-12-2004 about the illegal constructions being made by respondents 2 and 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the first respondent, without expressing any opinion with regard to the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 11-12-2004 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after affording due opportunity to respondents 2 and 3 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ 02-02-2005 Note: Issue C.C. by Monday. (B/o) kdl To 1. The Executive Officer, Jillelguda Gram Panchayat, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 2. Two C.D. Copies.