The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.20154 of 2011 Date: 12.09.2011 Between: D.Yadaiah ..... Petitioner AND 1.The GHMC, rep. by the Deputy Commissioner, Kapra Division, Ranga Reddy District and 3 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Vijay B.Paropkari Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Sri C.Damodar Reddy, SC for GHMC Counsel for Respondent No.2 to 4: Sri K.Mallikarjuna Rao The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1, in preventing respondent Nos.3 and 4 from proceeding with the construction over the land admeasuring Ac.2-09 guntas comprised in Survey Nos.3, 4 and 5 of Kapra Village and Municipality, Keesara Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, unauthorisedly and without permission, as illegal and arbitrary. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent Nos.2 to 4 have been raising unauthorised constructions over the aforesaid land without permission from respondent No.1- Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and that respondent No.1 has not been taking any action for removal of such constructions and preventing respondent Nos.2 to 4 from raising further constructions. A counter-affidavit, on behalf of respondent No.1, has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kapra Division, wherein it was inter alia stated that action was taken to prevent one Jagat C Shah, who is stated to have purchased the property in question from respondent No.2 and has been raising construction thereon, by removing the pillars partly. When certain discrepancies, in the counter-affidavit, were found by this Court, the Deputy Commissioner, Kapra Division, was summoned to appear in person. Accordingly, he has appeared before this Court and expressed his regret for the inconsistency in the counter-affidavit. He has undertaken to ensure that the columns already raised will be removed and the said Jagat C Shah will be prevented from raising further construction. Today, when the case came up for hearing, Sri C.Damodar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1, placed before the Court, Order, dated 16th August, 2011, in IA.No.741 of 2011 in OS.No.1640 of 2011, on the file of the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, whereby, on the application filed by Jagat C.Shah and Bhavana J.Shah, the civil Court has granted injunction against the Deputy Commissioner, Kapra Division of respondent No.1- Corporation restraining him from interfering with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule property till disposal of the suit. The order passed by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, which is in the nature of an ad interim order, prima facie appears to be out of the ordinary because the interim injunction was granted till disposal of the suit. As the said order is not the subject matter of the present proceedings, this Court refrains from making any observation in that regard. In view of the existence of an interim injunction order, till the said order is appropriately varied or vacated, no Mandamus can be issued by this Court to respondent No.1 to remove the alleged unauthorised constructions, raised on the petition schedule property. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.24430 of 2011, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 12th September, 2011 Note: Registry is directed to place Order, dated 16-08-2011, in IA.No.741 of 2011 in OS.No.1640 of 2011, passed by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, on administrative side to examine the propriety of the Judicial Officer in passing an ad interim order of injunction, in respect of the alleged unauthorised structures, in absolute terms “until disposal of the suit.” (B/o) LUR