IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 11312 of 2009 Between: Afshan, S/o. Sajeed Ali Siddiqui, r/o. H.No. 1-2-67/A, Alipura, Mulimpura, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Metpally Municipality, Rep by its Commissioner, Metpally, Karimnagar District. 2 Md. Fareed, S/o. Jabbar, R/o. H.No. 1-1-59, Muslimpura, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. .....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 issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not initiating appropriate action against the 2nd respondent in not considering the representation filed by the petitioner dated 14-3-2009 against the illegal constructions made by the 2ndrespondent which he had occupied the main road margin in Metpally locality, Ward No. 11, Metpally proper is illegal, arbitrary and unjust, and consequently direct the respondents to initiate appropriate action against the 2nd respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.RAVI MOHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.NAGESWARA REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 11312 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the petitioner’s representation dated 14.3.2009 complaining about the illegal and unauthorized constructions being made by the 2nd respondent, on the main road margin in Metpally locality, Ward No.11, Metpally, as arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. Since, admittedly the petitioner’s representation/complaint was received in the office of the 1st respondent on 14.3.2009, the 1st respondent is bound to consider and make necessary enquiry into the allegations made by the petitioner. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as to the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the representation/complaint made by the petitioner dated 14.3.2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to the respondent No.2 to rebut the allegations. Such exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. _______________ Justice G.Rohini Date:10.06.2009 mrb