IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21523 of 2008 Between: D.Shantilal Sangeetha Choudhary H.U.F., Rep by its Kartha S.Suresh Chudhary, S/o. D.Shantilal Choudhary, R/o. D.No.39, Bazaar Street, Tirupati, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Urban Development Authority, Rep by its Vice Chairman, Holding Ofice at TUDA Buldings, Tirupathi, Chittoor District 2 Tirupathi Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Holding Office at Municipal Building, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. .....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 any appropriate Writ, Order or direction prefereably a Writ in the nature of Writ ofMandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents in not disposing of the representation of the petitionr dated 9-8-2008 requesting the respondents not to accord any building permission to any one in any portion of the land in Sy.No.632/3K of Tirupathi Revenue Village accounts, chandragiri Taluk (now Mandal),. Chittoor District, in respect of which the petitioner has paid the entire sald consideration and has the valid agreement of sale, as being illegal, arbitrry, against the principles ofnatural justice and also violative of Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.DORAI RAJ Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.SVENKATESWARA RAO(SC FOR TTD) The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 21523 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been ﬁled by D.Shantilal Sangeetha Choudhary with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not disposing of the representation dated 9-8-2008 as arbitrary and illegal. 2. The petitioner claims to have purchased Ac.1-70 cents in Survey No. 623/3K under an agreement of sale. He ﬁled a suit being O.S.No.321 of 2006 on the ﬁle of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati for speciﬁc performance of agreement of sale and for delivery of possession. He submitted a representation to the respondents not to consider the building permission application in respect of land covered under agreement of sale. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission Sri S.I. Newton, learned standing counsel of Tirupati Municipal Corporation received notice on behalf of the 2nd Respondent. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. 5. As on this day, the petitioner has no title over the property. If the petitioner wants to prevent the constructions over the land in dispute, he has to approach the Civil Court and obtain necessary orders. 6. In the given facts and circumstances invocation of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is misconceived. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 30th September, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 21523 OF 2008 30th September, 2008.