THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 10146 of 2008 Oral order: The petitioner states that he made several representations to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 complaining about the illegal constructions made by respondent No.4 in the cellar portion of the building, which is meant for parking, but it is his grievance that so far no action thereon has been taken by respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 did not file counter. However, the learned Standing Counsel representing them on instructions submitted that a part of the wall raised by respondent No.4 was already demolished. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 did not give any notice to the petitioner before effecting demolition of the constructions made by respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 filed counter denying the averments made by the petitioner in the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner got issued legal notice alleging some more illegal constructions made by respondent No.4, and that till date there is no reply to the said notice. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and the learned counsel for respondent No.4 agreed to the disposal of the writ petition with the following directions: Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 shall issued notices to both the petitioner and respondent No.4 with regard to the alleged illegal constructions said to have been made by respondent No.4 as pointed by the petitioner in his legal notice, and after considering the objections, if any, to be submitted by them, consider the same and pass appropriate orders and thereafter take action in terms thereof, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 25th February, 2009 KSR