IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 2942 of 2009 Between: Mohd. Rafeeq Ahmed, S/o. Shri Mohd. Khalid Ahmed, in M.NO.20-4-1204/1,Land Bazaar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Greater Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Rep by its Special Officer, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 2 Syed Shafiuddin part of premises No.20-4-1204.Laad Bazaar Hyderabad. 3 Vijay Rathi M.No.20-2-121 of 127 Old Kabutar Khanan, Hyderabad. 4 Vikas Rathi, M.No.20-2-121 of 127 Old Kabutar Khanan, Hyderabad. .....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 a Writ, Order or direction and more particularly in the nature of writ of "Mandamus", directing the Respondents No.1 to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 22-10-2008 in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.R.A.ACHUTHANAND Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, and at their request, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of the property admeasuring 11.3 square yards forming part of premises bearing No.20- 4-1204/1 situated at Lad Bazar, Hyderabad having purchased the same from one Omprakash Rathi under a registered sale deed dated 23.12.2000. There is a dispute between himself and one Murtuza Ali and 10 others in regard to the said property and in regard thereto he has also filed a suit for perpetual injunction bearing O.S.No.154 of 2001 on the file of III Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and the said suit was decreed and the appeal filed against the said decree is pending. While so, the unofficial respondents 2 to 4 have started making certain constructions by demolishing the old structures as a result of which his property also got damaged and, therefore, he filed a suit O.S.No.1781 of 2008 on the file of VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad along with an application I.A.No.851 of 2008 wherein status quo order was granted on 24.10.2008. It is also stated that he made a representation to the 1st respondent Municipal Corporation complaining that the unofficial respondents are making constructions without obtaining any permission on 22.10.2008 but so far no action has been initiated on the said representation. The learned standing counsel for the respondent Municipal Corporation submits that since the representation of the petitioner is stated to be pending consideration before the 1st respondent, instead of this Court going into the merits of the matter, the authorities may be directed to consider and dispose of the said representation. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.10.2008 after issuing notice to the unofficial respondents and take necessary action as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.24.2.2009 msv