IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.4439 of 2008 Between: K.Ravinder Rao S/o.Late Sri Janardhan Rao, R/o.Parkal(V)&(M) Warangal Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dist Collector Warangal Dist 2 The Dist Panchyat Officer Warangal at Warangal 3 The Divisional Panchayat Officer Mulugu Division,Warangal Dist 4 The Executive Officer G.P Parkal, Parkal(M) Warangal Dist .....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 more particuarly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents No.4 in not granting permission for construction of tin shed in Sy.No.1108 admeasuring 816.33 sq.yards in Ward No.3 of Parkal G.P Pursuant to the application submitted in the month of July 2007 as illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14,21 and 300-A of the constitution of India besides violative of the A.Panchayat Raj Act and consequently direct the 4th respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner in the month of July 2007 with regard to the permission for construction of tin shed in Sy.No.1108 admeasuring 816.33 sq.yards in Ward No.3 of Parkal G.P Parkal(M) Warangal Dist and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.PARSAANANTH NAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.4439 of 2008 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the land admeasuring 816.83 sq. yards in Sy.No.1108, Ward No.3 of Parkal Gram Panchayat, Parkal Mandal, Warangal District. It is stated that he made an application before the 4th respondent in the month of July, 2007 seeking permission for construction of a tin shed, but, he did not consider his application. Therefore, he made a representation before the 2nd respondent on 24-12-2007 requesting to consider his application, which is pending before the 4th respondent. As no order has been passed either by the 2nd respondent or the 4th respondent, the petitioner is constrained to approach this court with the present writ petition. The main grievance of the petitioner is that his application seeking permission for construction of a tin shed is pending before the 4th respondent. As the application of the petitioner is pending before the 4th respondent for consideration, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission directing the 4th respondent to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner filed in the month of July, 2007. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 4th respondent to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner filed in the month of July, 2007, in accordance with law. However, the said exercise shall be done within a period of four weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 19-03-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}