IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 20800 of 2008 Between: Thunga Manemma W/o.Late Yadi Reddy R/o.H.No.2-3-12&13, Upparpalli village Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Commissioner ,Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool,Hyderabad 3 The Tahsildar,Rajendranagar Mandal Ranga Reddy 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 to issue an appropriate writ order or direction preferably one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking steps to demolish the compound wall of the petitioner in respect of the open site appurtenant to the petitioner house bearing Nos.2-3-12 and 2-3-13, situated in SY.No.18/1 situated in Upparapalli village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District during the pendency of the petitioner Application for regularization is pending consideration as arbitrary,illegal, discriminatory opposed to Government policy and contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.2.2008 and consequently direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the said site and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.KANAKAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : ORDER In the allotment of houses made by Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation Limited, the petitioner, one P.Raghava Reddy and T.Narasimha Reddy were allotted two houses in Plot No.2-3-12 and 2-3-13 respectively in the year 1980. It appears that the petitioner purchased those two houses from the said allottees and she is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. It is stated in the affidavit that subsequently, she dismantled the said houses and constructed a pucca house for the purpose of her children. Be that as it may, the revenue authorities identified the Government land, which is in her occupation, and asked her to vacate the same and also threatened to demolish the compound wall constructed long ago. Questioning the said action, the petitioner approached this court and filed the present writ petition. Heard the leaned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and also learned Government Pleader for Revenue. It appears that the petitioner submitted an application dated 26th August, 2008 seeking regularization in terms of G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.2.2008. When such an application is pending consideration, in my considered view, the petitioner ought not to have approached this Court and filed the writ petition. Since it is admitted by both the learned counsel that the said application is very much under consideration, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the said application and pass appropriate orders in terms of G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.2.2008. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Till the said application is considered and appropriate orders are passed, the compound wall of the petitioner shall not be demolished. No costs. ___________ 18-12-2008 rkk