THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26352 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner claims to have presented an appeal before the first respondent challenging the permission accorded to the second respondent on 18.02.2009 to construct a building. It is urged that though the appeal was presented way back on 01.06.2009, nothing has taken place so far. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent. The Municipal Council is not a regular forum to decide the appeals. The appeals preferred against the permissions accorded to individuals are to be placed before the Council, whenever the meeting takes place, depending upon the size of the agenda. Though it cannot be said that there was undue delay on the part of the first respondent in taking up the appeal, it is in the interest of all that it is disposed of at the earliest. The reason is that the third party rights would accrue and complications would arise on account of the delay. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to take up the appeal presented by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Any construction made by the second respondent shall be subject to the outcome of the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:03.12.2009 kdl