IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11064 of 2007 Between: 1 Jupudi Krishna, S/o. Subbanna, R/o. Akiveedu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District. 2 Jupidi Subbanna, S/o. Krishna, R/o. Akiveedu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Akiveedu Gram Panchayat, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, Akiveedu, West Godavari District. 2 Koppuruvuri Venkata Narayana, S/o. Venkateswarlu, R/o. Sai Baba Temple Street, Akividu, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the 1st respondent herein in not taking any action against the 2nd respondent for making illegal and unauthorized construction pursuant to the representation dt. 8-3-2007 of the Petitioners, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act and consequently direct the 1st respondent to remove the authorized constructio made by the 2nd respondent, and to grant such other relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.CHANDRA SHEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.PRABHAKARA RAO The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 11064 OF 2007 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners who are two in number assailing the inaction of the respondents on the representations submitted by them with regard to the removal of unauthorized constructions made by the 2nd Respondent. 2. Interim order came to be passed restraining the 2nd Respondent from proceeding with further construction vide W.P.M.P.No. 13824 OF 2007. Thereafter, the second Respondent entered appearance and filed W.V.M.P.No. 1549 OF 2007 with a prayer to vacate interim order. 3. When the vacate stay petition came up for consideration, both the counsel consented for disposal of the writ petition itself. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the 2nd Respondent made certain unauthorized constructions and the same are required to be removed by the 1st Respondent-Grampanchayath. 6. As seen from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, necessary steps have already been taken pursuant to the representations made by the petitioners. 7. For better appreciation I may refer para 2 of the counter affidavit of Respondent No.1 and it is thus: “With reference to the allegations made in para 3 and 4 of the affidavit, it is a fact that 2nd respondent is the absolute owner and possessor of Ac. 0-23 cents in Akiveedu village and applied for sanction of house plan and the same was accorded as per the building rules. The 2nd respondent started construction over his site. It is also a fact that the writ petitioners made a representation to the Gram Panchayath on 8-3-2007 alleging that the 2nd respondent is proceeding with the construction in violation of the sanctioned plan as the required set back of 1.5 mts of space is not left over from the southern boundary of the writ petitioners. Accordingly, inspection was made and found that the 2nd Respondent has not left the requird space of 1.5 mts from the southern boundary of the neighbours land. As the 2nd respondent is violating the building rules and making constructions deviating the sanctioned plan, a notice dated 28-5- 2007 was issued to make constructions in accordance with the sanctioned plan. In spite of the notice dated 28-5-2007, the 2nd respondent is proceeding with the construction without following the sanctioned plan, another notice dated 31-5-2007 was issued to stop the construction of the building forthwith and directed the 2nd respondent ot make construction according to the sanctioned plan. Even than also, the 2nd respondent completed the construction. Finally, on13-6-2007, notice was given to the 2nd Respondent to remove the balkanies constructed on the Eastern side and southern side of his building as the required space of 1.5 mts was not left over from the boundary of the neighbours. If the 2nd respondent did not removed the illegal constructions, appropriate action for removal of the same will be taken”. 8. Since necessary steps have already been taken by the 1st Respondent on the representation made by the petitioners, relief sought for, factually has been secured by the petitioners. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to complete the proceedings initiated on the representation of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. _____________________________ Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy 17th June, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 11064 OF 2007 17th June, 2008.