IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22076 OF 2002 THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE Between: Alaaparthi LaxmiManoharam, Hyderabad .... Petitioner And The Commissioner, Municipality Gudivada, Krishna District and another. ...Respondents Order: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions to the 1st respondent to pass orders in the light of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.9919 of 2001 dated 01-09- 2001. Certain individuals, who claim to have purchased flats in the residential complex constructed by the second respondent, namely, Suneetha Towers and Sai Sudha Apartment, in Eluru Road, Gudivada, have, earlier filed W.P.No.9919 of 2001 before this court questioning the proceedings dated 07-05- 2001 passed in U.C.No.3/2001 issued by the Commissioner, Gudivada Municipality, Gudivada, Krishna District. While setting aside the said proceedings, this court permitted the petitioners therein to file explanation to the notice issued to them and directed the respondents to pass appropriate orders. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of such directions, no orders have been passed by the respondent-Municipality. No relief can be granted in this writ petition for more reason than one. The second respondent, who is the builder, has not been served with notice. Further, though the petitioner is seeking directions to implement the directions issued by this court in W.P.No.9919 of 2001, the petitioners therein are not made parties in the present writ petition. If any directions are to be issued, the other individual flat-owners, who have filed W.P.No.9919 of 2001, will be the directly affected parties. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in this writ petition for grant of directions as prayed for, for non-joinder of necessary and proper parties. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. If the second respondent-builder has constructed any portions/flats, in the building in question, in deviation of the sanctioned plan, this order will not preclude the petitioner from approaching the competent authority for appropriate relief. No order as to costs. ____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. September 10, 2009 Gk/MRR IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22076 OF 2002 Date:10.09.2009. GK/MRR.