IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.18356 OF 2011 Between : Orimetla Hanumanthu ... PETITIONER A N D The Commissioner and others. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.18356 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent No.1 in not disposing of the representations, dated 29.01.2011 and 22.06.2011, made by the petitioner in the matter of illegal constructions being undertaken by respondent Nos.2 to 12 by encroaching the road in Survey No.262, situated at Block No.12, Ward No.32, Backside of Mekala Mandi, Mancherial, Adilabad District, as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 (for short, ‘the Act’) and consequently to direct respondent No.1 to take immediate action for removal of illegal constructions being made by respondent Nos.2 to 12 in the above said survey number. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of plot bearing No.27, situated in Survey No.261/A, Rallapet Road, Mancherial, Adilabad District. Respondent Nos.2 to 12 are carrying construction of residential buildings on their plots by encroaching the Road and also without obtaining any permission from Mancherial Municipality. Therefore, the petitioner and colony members made a representation, 29.01.2011 to respondent No.1 stating that respondent Nos.2 to 12 are making illegal constructions by encroaching the road in Survey No.262 situated at Block No.12, Ward No.32, Backside of Mekala Mandi, Macherial, Adilabad District. Though respondent No.1 received the representation made by the petitioner, it has not been considered and disposed of the same and it has not taken any action against respondent Nos.2 to 12. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Respondent No.1 filed detailed counter-affidavit stating that the area in which respondent Nos.2 to 12 are making constructions is undeveloped area. Neither the landowner, nor these respondents formed any roads. Therefore, in the absence of filing of any documents by the petitioner or respondent Nos.2 to 12, encroachments could not be traced by respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 issued notice, dated 24.06.2011 to respondent Nos.2 to 12 under Section 228(1) and (2) of the Act for removal of construction of basements constructed by them and further course of action is under process. 4. Recording the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed respondent No.1, this Writ Petition is closed as the representation of the petitioner has been considered by respondent No.1-Municipality. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J NOVEMBER 04, 2011. YVL