THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.3534 of 2010 Date of Order: 04-08-2010 Between: Mophammed Azamathullah and another ..Petitioner and 1. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad rep. by its Commissioner And another ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.3534 of 2010 Oral Order : (Per Honourable Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) The petitioners, who are the owners of the house property bearing No. 16-11-310/8/E/1 situated in Sy.No.7 of Ghafoor Bagh, Saleem Nagar Colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 15-05-2008, filed the present writ petition in the form of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for safeguarding the environment of Saleem Nagar Colony and restore the park to its original position as per the directions of this Court dated 23-08-2001 made in W.P.No.7335 of 2001 as confirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No.19582 of 2001, dated 26-11-2001 by removing the encroachment and the constructions made by the 2nd respondent in the area earmarked for park at Saleem Nagar Colony. In response to the notice, the respondents 1 and 2 filed counters. In the counter filed by the 1st respondent it is stated that on dismissing the SLP by the Supreme Court, the 2nd respondent made proposal to exchange the land admeasuring 1694 square yards in Sy.No.24 and 36, Block-A, Ward No.167 owned by it in lieu of 1800 square yards of the land earmarked for developing park, which is in occupation of the 2nd respondent. When the said proposal was forwarded to the State Government who in turn advised the Municipal Corporation to obtain necessary orders from the Supreme Court for considering the proposal made by the 2nd respondent for exchange of land. Pursuant to the same, the 2nd respondent filed I.A.No.3 of 2003 in S.L.P.No.19582 of 2001 seeking appropriate direction to consider the proposal made by it for exchange of land. The said I.A. was rejected on the ground that it was not filed on behalf of all the parties. Then the 2nd respondent filed I.A.No.4 of 2003 in the above SLP seeking approval of exchange of land. The said I.A. was dismissed on 13-08-2004 as withdrawn reserving liberty to file fresh application in accordance with its earlier order dated 10-07-2003 passed in I.A.No.3 of 2003. Pursuant to the same, the parties jointly filed I.A.No.5 of 2004. The said I.A. was disposed of by the Supreme Court with the following order: “ Heard learned counsel for parties. Both the parties stated that the matter has been compromised out side the Court I.A.No.5 of 2001 is accordingly disposed of. The Special Leave Petition is also disposed of in terms enumerated in I.A.No.5 of 2004 along with the affidavit, which shall form the part of the order, in which it has been stated that compensation shall be paid for the deficit land amounting to 106 square yards.” In view of the orders passed by the Supreme Court permitting the 2nd respondent to exchange the land and disposed of SLP in terms of compromise, entertaining the present writ petition filed for implementation of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.7335 of 2001, which is merged with the order of the Supreme Court, does not arise. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. ___________ K.C.BHANU,J. 04-08-2010 Murthy