IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 6405 of 2009 Between: 1 Mrs. Shahnaz Begum, W/o. Mohammed Imaduddin, R/o. D.No. 19-4-387, Near Al Siddiq School, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad. 2 Syed Basheer Ahmed, S/o. Shareef Ahmed, R/o. D.No. 19-4-372/23/2/4/1, Near Al Siddiq School, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 The Assistant City Planner Circle No.II GHMC Sardar Mahal, Hyderabad. 3 The Collector, Hyderabad District. 4 Mr. Ghulam Rasool, S/o.Not Known to the Petitioner, R/o. 19-4-418/9, Near Al Siddiq School, Bahadurpura, 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 appropriate Writ or Writs order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 1 to 3, in not acting upon the representation dated 20-3-2009, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3, to act upon the representation dated 20-3-2009, against the respondent No.4 in accordance with law, as regards to illegal construction on public road abutting to the property bearing H.No. 19-4-418/9, situated near Al Siddiq School, Bhadurpura, Hyderabad, in the interest of justice, and grant such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.JAMALI 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 petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent – Municipal Corporation and at their request the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. The only grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that even though he made a representation on 20.3.2009 to respondents 1 to 3 stating that the 4th respondent herein is making constructions in a frantic manner by constructing a wall across the east to west road, thereby obstructing the flow of traffic from the locality to the main road leading to NH 7, they have not taken any action so far. Therefore, he filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. The learned standing counsel for the respondent Corporation submits that the petitioner has made the representation only on 20.3.2009 and without even waiting for any action being taken by the authorities, hurriedly approached this Court. Admittedly, as stated by the learned standing counsel for the respondent, the petitioner made the representation only on 20.3.2009 and approached this Court stating that the respondents failed to take any action on his representation. Therefore, it is too premature to say that the respondents are not acting on the representation of the petitioner. In the circumstances, if the representation said to have been made by the petitioner is still pending consideration, the official respondents may consider the same and take necessary action in accordance with law. With the above direction, the writ petition is dismissed. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.26.3.2009 msv