HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.4261 and 18594 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: These two writ petitions are connected with each other. Hence, they are being disposed of through a common order. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in W.P.No.4261 of 2010. The petitioners are residents of Osmanpura area of Jagitial, Karimnagar District. The 2nd respondent is the owner of premises bearing No.3-16-115-F, in the same locality. The petitioners and one Mr.Azeemuddin filed W.P.No.7157 of 2007 alleging that though the 2nd respondent has made illegal construction over an area, which was earmarked as 10 feet land connecting two roads, the 1st respondent did not take any steps. The writ petition was disposed of, on 16.07.2008, directing the 1st respondent to take necessary action on the representation made by the petitioners. The petitioners allege that in compliance with the directions issued by this Court, the 1st respondent demolished the wall that was constructed across the 10 feet lane, but the 2nd respondent has reconstructed the wall thereafter. W.P.No.4261 of 2010 is filed seeking A declaration to the effect that the failure of the 1st respondent in taking action against the 2nd respondent for the unauthorized construction made by her is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the A.P. Municipalities Act. A consequential direction is sought for removal of encroachment across the road. The son of the 2nd respondent, in turn, filed W.P.No.18594 of 2010 with a prayer to direct the Municipality, the 1st respondent, not to interfere with the said property. Counter-affidavits are filed by the respective parties and arguments are advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. The dispute between the petitioners, on the one hand, and the 2nd respondent, on the other, turns around, the nature and character of the area is depicted as 10 feet lane. Since several proceedings have ensued between the parties before this Court as well as civil Court, the matter was examined in detail. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent has placed before this Court the deposition of one Mr.M.A.Abdul Jaleel, Town Planning Supervisor of the Municipality, as DW.1 in O.S.No.1211 of 1991. In the cross-examination of that witness made on behalf of the 2nd respondent, he has categorically admitted that the Municipality does not have any right over the site in question. Further, a perusal of the permission accorded to the petitioners reveals that the road on the eastern side of the building owned by the 2nd respondent has a dead- end and it does not proceed further. The effort of the petitioners is to get the said road extended, till it touches another road, which is on the western side of the property of the 2nd respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not able to point out the basis, on which part of the property, owned by the 2nd respondent, is sought to be treated as A 10 feet lane. Further, learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality is also not able to produce any record, in this connection. To a specific question, as to whether the layout or master plan for the concerned area provides for any road on the northern side of the property of the 2nd respondent, nothing is forthcoming. If the plan sanctioned in favour of the petitioners and others in the locality together with the deposition of DW.1 in O.S.No.1211 of 1991 are read together, it clearly emerges that there is absolutely no basis for the claim made by the petitioners. Therefore, W.P.No.4261 of 2010 is dismissed. W.P.No.18594 of 2010 is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:29.03.2011 GJ