IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 27207 of 2008 Between: 1. S. Narayana, S/o. Narsimha, R/o. Dhoolmitta Village, Maddur Mandal, Warangal District. 2. A. Srilatha, W/o. A. Bhoopal Reddy, R/o. Flat No.101, Sriniketan Apartments, Vidyanagar, Hyderabad - 500 044. 3. K. Suhasini, W/o. K. Tirupathi Rao, 2-10-826, Nakkalagutta, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. 4. B. Rajyalakshmi, W/o. Sekharaiah, H.No. 2-10-829, Nakkalagutta, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. Municipal Corporation of Warangal, Rep by its Commissioner, Warangal. 2. Town Planning Officer, Municipal Corporation, Warangal. 3. Garikapati Satish Chandra, S/o. Prasad, Waddepally Village, Besides Teachers Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. .....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 any writ, order or directions more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the inaction of the 1st Respondent in not considering the representation dated 29-10-2008 submitted by the petitioners herein as arbitrary illegal and consequently direct the 3rd respondent herein to stop the construction being raised by him in plot bearing No. 2-10-785/5 in Waddepalli Village, Besides Teachers Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondents: MR.S.NAGESWARA REDDY The Court made the following: HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI W.P.NO.27207 OF 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that inaction on the part of the 1st respondent in considering the representation dated 29.10.2008 made by the petitioners complaining about the alleged illegal constructions being made by the 3rd respondent herein in the plot bearing No.2-10-785/5, Waddepalli Village, Beside Teachers Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal, is illegal and arbitrary. Though no counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, the 3rd respondent in his counter affidavit denied all the allegations made by the petitioners. Heard the learned counsel for both parties. Having regard to the fact that the controversy between the parties involves various disputed questions of fact, though I am not inclined to express any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to enquire into the allegations made by the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the representation/complaint dated 29.10.2008 made by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the 3rd respondent herein to rebut the allegations made by the petitioners. Such exercise shall be completed by the 1st respondent as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the status quo as ordered by this Court pending this writ petition shall be maintained. No costs ____________ 16-06-2009 kvrm HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI W.P.NO.27207 OF 2008 DATED 16.06.2009