THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32223 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the Endorsement Grievance No.Zone-III/108/2011, dated 14.10.2011, issued by respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The averments, in brief, stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring 392 Square Yards along with house thereon bearing D.No.10-1-1 in plot No.15 in Survey No.76, T.S.No.76/4, Waltair Ward No.24, Block No.9, Circle 2, Division 24 situated at Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam. A part of her land to an extent of 65 Square yards was acquired for road widening purpose for the first time in 1998, for which she received compensation. Thereafter, respondent No.1 again acquired a portion of her land admeasuring 76.56 Square Yards in the year 2005. Since no compensation was paid for the second acquisition, she made several representations to the respondent corporation, but in vain. Therefore, she filed W.P.No.18418 of 2010, wherein this Court directed the respondents to pay compensation for the land if any taken from the petitioner for public purpose. Since the respondents did not pay any compensation other than the compensation which was paid earlier, she made a representation on 19.04.2011 to the respondent corporation and filed W.P.MP.No.16147 of 2011 in W.P.No.18418 of 2010, wherein this Court by order dated, 13.06.2011, directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.04.2011. As per the directions of this Court dated 13.06.2011 the impugned order was passed. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 3. Heard both sides. 4. In pursuance of the orders passed by this Court on 13.06.2011 in W.P.MP.No.16147 of 2011 in W.P.No.18418 of 2010 the impugned order was passed on 14.10.2011 stating that at the request of the petitioner the TDR for balance site area was also awarded and the same was received by the petitioner. There is no reference to the contents of the representation made by the petitioner, dated 10.10.2011. The impugned order is very cryptic and does not contain any reasons at all for arriving such a conclusion and on what grounds the plea of the petitioner has been rejected. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside. 5. The petitioner seems to have given a representation on 18.11.2011 claiming compensation giving the details. Appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondents in accordance with law. Therefore, the respondents are directed to take appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioner, dated 18.11.2011, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after giving a personal hearing to the petitioner. For any reason if the representation dated 18.11.2011 is not available with the respondent corporation, the petitioner is at liberty to give a fresh representation within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the respondents shall take appropriate decision within a period of eight weeks. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J December 08, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Dated: 08.12.2011 PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32223 OF 2011 Between: Mrs. (Dr.) Kotcherlakota Lalitha Kumari ..... PETITIONER AND The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32223 OF 2011 December 08, 2011 MD