HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9978 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner has purchased the plot of 152 square yards in survey No.539/1 of Gollapudi Village, Vijayawada Rural Mandal, Krishna District in the year 2002. In his immediate neighbourhood, the 2nd respondent purchased a plot of 142 square yards. The petitioner submitted a representation, dated 06-09-2006, to the 1st respondent stating that the 2nd respondent constructed a four storied building on the site and is proposing to let out the same for establishment of a Bar and Club. He further alleged that the 4th respondent is encroached into a part of his plot and ultimately requested the 1st respondent to enquire into the matter. The petitioner states that the 1st respondent instructed the Gram Panchayat to take necessary action through letter, dated 23-09-2006. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents 1 and 3 have not taken any steps so far, against the unauthorised construction. 2. The 2nd respondent filed a counter – affidavit opposing the writ petition. She contends that she made construction of ground, first and second floors on the basis of a permission accorded by the Gram Panchayat and a small room constructed upon the terrace of the third floor was objected, she filed an application for regularization. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents. 4. The petitioner is under the impression that the 2nd respondent made construction without any permission at all. It, however, appears that the 2nd respondent obtained construction permission from the Gram Panchayat for construction of ground, first and second floors. Assuming that the 2nd respondent made any unauthorised construction, being the immediate neighbour, the petitioner ought to have initiated steps. He virtually acknowledged the alleged encroachment on the part of the 2nd respondent. Further, once it emerges that the construction was made on the basis of the permission at least to the extent of ground and two upper floors, there is hardly anything, which this Court can do at this belated stage. 5. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J March 24, 2011. KTL