IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 12936 of 2009 Between: Mohd. Bin Salam S/o. Late Salam Bin Ahmed R/o. H.No. M.C.No.164, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Dy. Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Circle IV, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 3 Natural Famly Saloon, No.8-2-332/1, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. .....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 a writ or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in not taking action pursuant to the representation dated 20.06.2009 of the petitioner, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and be pleased to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.VENKATA MAYUR Counsel for the Respondent No.: (SC FOR MCH CIRCLES 3&5)KALPANA EKBOTE The Court made the following : ORDER: Heard, Learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt Kalpana Ekbote, learned standing counsel appearing for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 1 and 2 failed to take any action against the third respondent herein, who is allegedly running a Family Saloon in the adjacent premises. The material on record shows that the said representation sent by registered post was received in the office of respondents 1 and 2. In the circumstances without expressing any opinion as to the correctness of the allegations by the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the third respondent to rebut the allegations made. Such exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. _______________ G.ROHINI,J July 21, 2009. Ivd