HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21500 of 2005 Date : 02.12.2009 Between : Apikatla Peter. …..Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Municipal Administration & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21500 of 2005 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions against respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the constructions being made by respondents 3 to 9, in Survey No.8 of A.N.T. Road, Warangal town. 2. Though no counter affidavits are filed by the respondents, a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition shows that the only grievance of the petitioner is that as he is claiming the land in which constructions are being undertaken by the unofficial respondents, and as he has already approached the Land Grabbing Tribunal to establish title and for recovery of possession, respondents 1 and 2 should not allow respondents 3 to 9 to undertake the constructions. Along with the writ petition, the petitioner has filed a copy of the representation, dated 13.01.2004, which is addressed to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Warangal. From a perusal of the said representation, it is clear that the constructions undertaken by the unofficial respondents are based on the permission granted by the Municipal Corporation. In the said representation, the petitioner has requested to recall the permission already granted to the unofficial respondents for making constructions. 3. While it is open for the petitioner to establish his title before the competent Forum, but on the ground that he is claiming title and recovery of possession, he cannot seek for any directions against respondents 1 and 2 to stop the constructions being made by the unofficial respondents, more so, when such constructions are covered by the permission as contemplated under the provisions of the Municipalities Act. As no other ground is raised for consideration, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 2nd December 2009 ajr