HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24706 of 2008 Date : 04.10.2010 Between : Sri T.Venkat Reddy & others. …..Petitioners And The Special Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24706 of 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is filed by 19 individuals, claiming to be the residents of Saraswathi Colony in Ward No.13 of Uppal, presently under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. The grievance of petitioners is that in the vicinity of their locality, a commercial complex known as ‘Jayachandra Complex’, has come up, wherein, several commercial establishments are located. It is their case that there are encroachments infront of the aforesaid complex and the haphazard parking of vehicles by the persons visiting the said complex, is causing inconvenience to the residents of the locality. It is stated that inspite of their complaints, no steps are being taken by the respondents. Counter affidavit is filed by the Deputy Commissioner of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. While denying the various allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated in the counter that the complex in question was constructed about 10 to 15 years back, when Uppal was the Municipality and was governed by the provisions of the A.P. Municipalities Act. It is stated that after receipt of letter from the Standing Counsel, respondents have already issued notices under Section 461 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and steps are being taken accordingly. It is further stated in the counter that on the complaint made by the residents of the locality on 09.03.2008, the officials of the Corporation have visited the site and instructed the owners of ‘Jayachandra Complex’ not to park vehicles, obstructing the way. A reference is also made to the further notices, dated 20.09.2010, issued under Section 452 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, for removal of the unauthorized constructions. It is stated that further steps will be taken in accordance with law, without any delay. As evident from the counter affidavit, the complex in question is constructed about 10 to 15 years back, when Uppal was not brought under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. Though the petitioners have pleaded for removal of unauthorized constructions and to regulate the parking infront of the complex, in the absence of any clear particulars, it is not possible for this Court to order for removal of any structures. As it is stated in the counter that the respondents have already issued instructions for regulating the parking and also issued notices under Sections 461 and 452 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to take all possible steps for removal of congestion infront of the complex and also the unauthorised constructions, if any, infront of the complex, as expeditiously as possible, by giving the opportunity of hearing, to all concerned. Subject to the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 4th October 2010 ajr