IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 27185 of 2008 Between: Dr. Suresh Raj Saxena S/o. Jagdish Pershad Saxena R/o. G-131, Madhuranagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat buildings, Hyderabad. 2 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tankbund, Hyderabad, rep. by its Commissioner. 3 Assistant City Planner, Cirlce X, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. 4 Prasad, G-71, Madhuranagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents one to three in not removing the illegl construction being made upon the public street between plot No.G-131 and G-71 Madhuranagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad inspite of representations as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to take actilon against the persons who have occupied the public street between G-131 and G-71 of Madhuranagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad after removing the encroachments and illegal constructions made in G-71 while declaring that the public street between G-131 and G-71of Madhuranagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad has to be free from encroachments and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.S.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The petitioner asserts that he purchased a house in Plot No.G-131 in Madhuranagar under registered sale deed dated 21.9.2001 and behind his plot there is a road and on the other side of the road, there is another plot No.G-71 and since April, 2008 the 4th respondent has been making some illegal constructions encroaching and touching his compound wall in the rear portion of his house. Then, he made a representation dated 18.7.2008 and also on 18.10.2008 to the 3rd respondent Assistant City Planner and the Additional Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipality Corporation, respectively, for removal of such constructions, and the petitioner’s grievance is that the respondents-authorities have not taken any steps for removal of illegal constructions, nor passed any orders thereon. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Though, this Court, on 18.12.2008, admitted the writ petition, the officials respondents have not filed any counter affidavit so far, as such, this Court feels that instead of keeping the writ petition pending, the same can be disposed of with the following directions: “The 3rd respondent-Assistant City Planner is directed to consider the representations dated 18.7.2008 / 18.10.2008 made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law after issuing notice to the 4th respondent and affording an opportunity to put forth his case, and then take necessary action thereon, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 9th February, 2009 bcj