IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS.V AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 32873 of 1998 Between: Syed Yousufuddin @ Syed Yusuf, S/o. Late Nizamuddin, Reservoir Water Tank, Nagara Panchayat Zaheerabad, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Nagar Panchayat, Zaheerabad, Medak District. 2 Commissioner and Director, Municipal Administration, Hyderabad. .....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 issued an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring Notice bearing No.A2/98, dt.12.2.1998 issued by the 1st Respondent directing the to petitioner to from the allotted watchman quarter at reservoir water tank, Zaheerabad, is illegal, arbitrary, unwarranted and unconstitutional and consequently quash the notice issued by the 1st respondent bearing No.A2/98, dated 12.2.1998 and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.KHADER MOHIDDIN Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ESWAR} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.32873 of 1998 O R D E R: This writ petition is field questioning the impugned Notice of the Commissioner, Nagar Panchayat, Zaheerabad issued vide Notice bearing No.A2/98, dated 12- 02-1998, particularly, where the petitioner was asked to vacate the watchman quarter at reservoir water tank, Zaheerabad, within 15 days. 2. In response to the said notice, the petitioner gave a reply with regard to the allegations made against him that he was absent from duty and the entire area of reservoir is filled with uncleanness etc. 3. The petitioner claims that he has given a reply dated 10-03-1998 requesting the Commissioner, Nagar Panchayat, Zaheerabad, to consider his case and he has furnished explanation with respect to the default pointed out against him. Because of threat of eviction, the petitioner appears to have filed this writ petition and by order dated 17-06-1999, the impugned proceedings are suspended and the suspension continues through out. 4. The respondents have neither filed counter affidavit nor there is any representation. 5. In view of the fact that the impugned orders are under suspension at least from 1999, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner’s reply dated 10-03-1998 together with existing overall circumstances and pass appropriate final order after giving notice and opportunity to the petitioner. The respondents are also directed to pass a reasoned order within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further in view of the fact that the impugned order has been suspended by this Court in 1999 and petitioner claims to be continuing in possession of the quarter, the status quo as is existing now shall continue pending consideration of the petitioner’s reply. 6. As directed above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ________________ 08-08-2008 kvr