IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.5341 of 2007 Between: Smt. K. Anasuja W/o. K. Venkatesham R/o. H.No. 1-1-60/1/A, Behind Venkateshwara Theatre, Banswada, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, L.B. Nagar Municipality, at L.B.Nagar, R.R. District. 2 The Town Planning Officer, L.B.Nagar Municipality, L.B.Nagar , R.R. District. 3 Smt. K. Aruna W/o. Raju R/o. Plot No. 487/A, Sripuram Colony, Opp: B.N. Reddy Nagar, 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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respnodent authorities in not taking any action on the representation dt. 30-11-2006 and 19-12-2006 followed by legal notice dt. 30-1-2007 requesting to take immediate action against the 3rd Respondent from proceeding with the construction without obtaining requisite permission/sanction as mandated in G.O.Ms.No. 623 of 2006 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to forthwith demolish the illegal structures raised by the 3rd Respondent in plot No. 487/A Sripuram Colony, Opp. B.N. Nagar, R.R. District and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.5341 of 2007 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that she is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring 273 sq. yards in Plot No.630, in Sy.No.59(P) of Karmanghat village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The 3rd respondent, who is the owner of her adjacent plot, proceeded with the construction, without obtaining necessary permission from the respondent Municipality and without maintaining proper set backs as provided for in G.O.Ms.No.623 of 2006, duly encroaching into the petitioner’s land. In this connection, she made a representation before the 1st respondent on 30-11-2006 requesting to stop the illegal construction made by the 3rd respondent. But, no action has been initiated. Therefore, she approached this court and filed the present writ petition. Through respondent Nos.3 and 4 are served with notice, they have not chosen to appear in person or through counsel. Having considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for R-1 and R-2, this court is of the view that respondents 3 and 4 must have completed the entire construction. But, however, as it is the grievance of the petitioner that the unofficial respondents encroached into the land of the petitioner, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 30-11-2006, by conducting enquiry into the allegations made by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is needless to observe that before passing any orders, the 1st respondent is directed to cause notice to the petitioner as well as unofficial respondents and hear them and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 16-12-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}