IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 5743 of 2009 Between: Mohammed Yaseen S/o.Late Haji Mohammed Osman R/o.19-2-238/3/G, Ramnasthpura, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner-Special Officer, Office at Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Assistant City Planner, Circle No.2, Sardar Mahal, Hyderabad. 3 Mohammed Jahangir R/o.19-2-238/3/H/1, Ramnasthpura, Bahadurpura, 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 to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents No.1 and 2 in not taking appropriate action to demolish the illegal and unauthorized construction being made by the respondent No.3 at H.No.19-2-238/3/H/1, Ramnasthpura, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad as per the provisions of HMC Act, 1955 as illegal, arbitrary and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.ABDUL NAJEEB KHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The petitioner asserts that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the house bearing No.19-2-238/3/G situated at Ramnasthpura, Hyderabad under registered Gift Settlement Deed dated 05.09.1994. While so, the 3rd respondent, whose house is situated on the northern side of the petitioner’s house, demolished it and started making construction of a multi-storied building illegally and without leaving set back on the north-east corner thereby touching the petitioner’s house depriving him of his easementary rights of free flow of air and ventilation. Then, the petitioner made a representation dated 13.3.2009 to respondents 1 and 2 requesting them to take action against the unofficial respondent by stopping the illegal constructions being made by him, but his grievance is that the official respondents have neither stopped the illegal constructions nor passed any orders on his representation. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Since the representation dated 13.03.2009 said to have been made by the petitioner is pending consideration before the official respondents, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The 1st and 2nd Respondents i.e. the Commissioner-Special Officer and the Assistant City Planner, G.H.M.C., are directed to consider the representation dated 13.03.2009 said to have been made by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law.” Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 20th March, 2009 bcj