THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI Writ Petition No. 10931 of 2011 Dated: 19.04.2011 Between: Chintala Eashwar, Hyderabad and 2 others. … Petitioner And The District Collector, Hyderabad and 7 others. … Respondents THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 10931 of 2011 O R D E R : The petitioners herein claim to be absolute owners of House bearing No.6- 2-577,Chintalbasti, Hyderabad. Similarly, the 3rd petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of House Nos.6-2-578 and 579 of Chinthalbasti. It is alleged that the respondents 7 and 8 having purchased House No.6-2-585 which is situated towards Eastern side of the house of the petitioners 1 and 2 and South-West side of the house of the 3rd petitioner started constructing a new building without obtaining the permissions as required under law. It is also alleged that the respondents 7 and 8 had encroached upon the open place belonging to the Government thus causing inconvenience to the petitioners and other residents of the locality. In the circumstances, the petitioners made a complaint to the respondent No.6 on 07.03.2011. Pursuant thereto, the 6th respondent having visited the site directed the respondents 7 and 8 not to make any constructions on the public path way. However, the officials failed to take any further action in view of the pendency of O.S.NO.767 of 2011 on the file of the Court of the XXII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The petitioners had again made another representation dated 11.04.2011 bringing to the notice of the respondents 1 to 6 herein the unauthorized and illegal constructions being made by the respondents 7 and 8 and requesting to take immediate action to stop the said unauthorized and illegal constructions. Alleging the respondents 1 to 6 failed to take any action, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner while submitting that in O.S.No.767 of 2011 filed by the respondents 7 and 8 herein an interim injunction was granted only against the writ petitioners and that the respondents 1 to 6 herein are not parties to the said suit, contended that there is no justification for the inaction on the part of the respondents 1 to 6. I have also heard the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 to 6. Since the material available on record shows that the representation made by the petitioners was received in the Office of the respondents 1 to 6 herein on 11.04.2011, they are bound to make the necessary enquiry into the grievances of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as to the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent 4 to 6 to consider the representations made by the petitioner dated 11.04.2011 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the respondents 7 and 8 to rebut the allegations. Such exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. _______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 19.04.2011 KLP