THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 9216 of 2003 Date: 29.11.2011 Between: Yadav High School, Old Guntur Guntur. … Petitioner And The District Collector, Guntur District and 3 others. … Respondents HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 9216 of 2003 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in permitting the 4th respondent to construct a Kalyanamandapam adjacent to the building of the petitioner-school is arbitrary and illegal. It is pleaded that the proposed construction is against the interest of the students of the petitioner-school and therefore, the petitioner made a representation dated 23.04.2003 requesting the respondents not to allow the 4th respondent to proceed with the construction of the Kalyanamandapam. Alleging that the respondents 1 to 3 failed to take any action, the present writ petition is filed. Though the petitioner sought an interim direction not to grant permission to the 4th respondent to construct the Kalyanamandapam, this Court by order dated 13.10.2004 declined to grant any such interim direction and the miscellaneous petition was dismissed. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3, it is stated that the construction of a community hall by the side of the petitioner-school was sanctioned under the Member of Parliament Area Scheme with an estimated cost of Rs. 5 lakhs during the year 2001-2002 and the same was entrusted to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Guntur as per the guidelines issued by the Government of India under a Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme. It is also stated that the Commissioner had already taken up the construction work and the building came up to foundation level as of the date of the filing of the counter i.e. 07.07.2003. It is further explained that the District Administration had followed all the rules in vogue in sanctioning the community hall and the contentions raised by the petitioner are untenable. As could be seen, by the date of the filing of the writ petition itself, the construction of the Kalyanamandapam was already in progress. Moreover, there is no interim order during the pendency of this writ petition restraining the respondents from proceeding with the construction work. Even on merits, no case could be made out by the petitioner to show that the construction of the Kalyanamandapam in question is contrary to law. Hence, interference by this Court is not warranted on any ground whatsoever. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 29.11.2011 KLP