IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.4182 of 2009 Between: M.Suresh Babu, S/o. M.V.J Gupta, Subash Raod, Ananthapur. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Anantapur Municipal Corporation, rep by its Municipal Commissioner, Ananthapur. 2 The Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings, C/o. Executive Engineer Office, Opp: Medical College Campus, Ananthapur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not disposing the petitioner’s representation/objections dt.31.10.2008, 14.02.2009 and pending consideration of representations/objections unilaterally and contrary to the Master Plan specifications, proceeding the works, as arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents to pass speaking orders basing on the representations/objections dated 31.10.2008 and 14.02.2009 as early as possible preferably with in a period of two weeks. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.MAHESWARA RAO Counsel for Respondent No.1: MR.S.I.NEWTON Counsel for Respondent No.2: G.P. FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.4182 of 2009 ORDER: The only grievance of the petitioner is that on the western side of his house, an eighty feet road was proposed to be laid by the respondent authorities and since there were certain deviations from the master plan, he submitted representations dated 31.10.2008 and 14.02.2009 to the respondent authorities requesting them to see that the road is laid strictly in accordance with the master plan, but no action has been taken thereon till date and on the other hand the respondents have been making efforts to lay the road contrary to the master plan. Heard the learned counsel on either side and they have agreed to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The 1st respondent – Municipal Commissioner, Anantapur Municipal Corporation, is directed to consider the representations dated 31.10.2008 and 14.02.2009 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 3rd March, 2009 IBL