THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.13688 OF 2009 5th November 2009 Between: Sakina Banu and one other. …PETITIONERS AND Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep.by its Special Officer and Commissioner, Tank Bund road, Hyderabad and two others. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.13688 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners have approached various authorities and Courts alleging that the third respondent made construction by encroaching the neighbouring public land and causing inconvenience to them. It is stated that in the proceedings at various stages, their contention was upheld and respondents 1 and 2 were about to take steps to demolish the appending portion. At that stage, the third respondent is stated to have filed an application for regularization of the unauthorized construction under the Building Penalization Scheme {Scheme}. The petitioners state that the representation made by them is not being taken into account by the respondents. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2. The very fact, that the third respondent submitted an application under the Scheme, discloses that she is reconciled to the fact that the building constructed by her is in deviation of the provisions of law or the sanctioned plan. Inasmuch the petitioners have been raising objections before various fora for the construction, they are entitled to put forward their contentions before the first respondent also vis-à-vis the application submitted by the third respondent for regularization. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing that, a) The first respondent shall take up the application submitted by the third respondent for regularization and decide the same within a period of three {3} months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; b) It shall be open for the petitioners to put forward their contentions/objections before the first respondent vis-à-vis the application submitted by the third respondent; and that the same shall be taken into account, before any orders are passed. c) The further course of action would depend upon the outcome of the application submitted by the third respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 5th November 2009 RRB