IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13430 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Ishaq. S/o M.A. Rasheed R/o H. No. 16-85, Subash Nagar, Mahaboobnagar, mahaboobngar District, ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Mahaboobnagar Municipality, rep by Commissioner, Mahaboobnagr, Mahaboobnagar District 2 Goud jangaiah S/o Chinnayya R/o 8-6-64, Padmavathi Colony, Mahaboobnagar, Mahaboobnagr District .....RESPONDENTS 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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the action of the 1st respondent in not taking action against the respondent No;2 and permitting him to construct House along with compound walls by occupying the Municipal Road without there being any sanction plan is contrary to the Municipal Sanction Plan, which sanctioned 30 sq. Feet Road and not considering the petitioner's complaints as illegal, unjust and arbitrary, without jurisdiction contrary to Municipalities Act and as such liable to be set-a side in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.M.SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.RADHA KRISHNA POLISETTY (SC FOR MPL) The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition has been filed by Mohd.Ishaq with a prayer to issue Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Mahaboobnagar Municipality-1st Respondent on his representation of complaining illegal construction made by Goud Jangaiah-2nd respondent as arbitrary and illegal. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. It is the contention of the petitioner that the second respondent is making construction over a public street without there being any sanctioned plan. A representation dated 21.4.1980 has been submitted by the petitioner. Inaction of the 1st respondent is assailed in this writ petition. Such is the situation, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 1st respondent to consider the representation dated 21.4. 1980, after putting on notice the affected parties, and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. __________ 26.06.2008 rkk .. REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Mahaboobnagar Municipality, rep by Commissioner, Mahaboobnagr, Mahaboobnagar District 2.2CD copies