THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.12578 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner claims that she is the absolute owner of house bearing Door No.20-6-224, Main Road, Ramalingeswarpet, Vijayawada and is residing therein. She states that the second respondent, who is the owner of the abutting vacant land to an extent of 140 sq.yards, started construction of apartment, without leaving any setbacks and without following any rules and regulations, thereby causing inconvenience to her as well as to other neighbours. Therefore, she claims to have approached the first respondent- Corporation by making a representation, dated 06.03.2009, brining to its notice the irregularities being made by the second respondent in constructing the apartment and though the Building Inspector inspected the premises and directed the second respondent not to proceed further with the construction, the second respondent is proceeding with the construction. Hence, she claims to have made another representation, dated 09.04.2009, in vain. Hence, the present writ petition. When the matter came up for consideration on 29.06.2009, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent- Corporation sought time to get instructions. Subsequently, on 30.06.2009 the learned Standing Counsel submitted that pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner, dated 06.03.2009, necessary steps were already taken and sought time to file counter in the matter explaining the steps that were taken. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Standing Counsel filed a counter in the matter admitting that the second respondent commenced construction in deviation to the approved plan, without leaving setbacks and therefore, action has already been initiated by the fist respondent by issuing notice. That construction work was immediately stopped and second floor was demolished completely, as approval was given only for construction of ground and first floor. But, however, it is stated that the second respondent has constructed only residential building but not apartment. Finally, it is stated that further action will be taken as per the procedure laid down under law. As the first respondent-Corporation has already initiated action against the constructions made by the second respondent in deviation to the sanctioned plan, as stated in the counter, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no further orders are necessary in the writ petition. In the circumstances, the writ petition is closed. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:19.07.2010 VGB