IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 15750 of 2008 Between: N. Adinarayana Murthy, S/o. Late N. Satyanarayana Murthy, D.G(S), Cabinet Secretariat, (Retired), Government of India, R/o. 72 LIG-II, B.K. Guda, S.R. Nagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC, Circle No. 10, (Old No.5), Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 3 The Assistant City Planner, GHMC, Circle No. 10, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 4 K. Bhaskara Rao, S/o. K. Seetharamaiah, R/o. 73 LIG-II, BK Guda, S.R. Nagar, 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 issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of "WRIT OF MANDAMUS"declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not taking any action on the representation dated 13-6-2008 of the petitioner pending with them in connection with the unauthorized and illegal construction of the fourth respondent which is effecting the petitioner's easement rights such as light and air as arbitrary, illegal and quite contrary to law and consequently restrain the fourth respondent by giving specific direction to the 1st respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.C.ACHARYULU Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.KALPANA EKBOTE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 15750 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been filed assailing the inaction of the respondents 1 to 3 on the representation submitted to them complaining unauthorized constructions made by K.Bhaskara Rao –4th respondent 2. When the writ petition came up for admission Sri Kalpana Ekbote, learned standing counsel for Hyderabad Municipal Corporation takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3. 4. The petitioner purchased a house 72 LIG-II M.C.H.No. 7-1- 277/59/24, situated at B.K.Guda, S.R. Nagar, Hyderabad from Andhra Pradesh Housing Board vide Document No.620/93, dated 12-7-1993. He constructed the building in accordance with the permission granted by the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation vide Permission No. 198/87 of 2001 in File NO. 277/59/24/1/7/2001, dated 22-12-2001. When the 4th Respondent was proceeding with the construction without any permission, the petitioner submitted a representation to respondents 1 to 3. 4th Respondent proceeded with construction in violation of the sanctioned plan without leaving any set backs. The petitioner submitted representations to respondents 1 to 3 complaining unauthorized constructions made by the 4th respondent. There being no action on his representation, he approached this Court by invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. The fact of the petitioner submitting representation is not contradicted by the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 6. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of , directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders after putting on notice to affected party i.e. 4th respondent within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs. _____________________________ Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy 22nd July, 2008. Note: C.C. in three days B/o KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 15750 OF 2008 22nd July, 2008.