IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 5794 of 2005 Between: Shantamma W/o.Panny Swamy R/o.29-14, Madhuranagar Colony, Neredmet, Malkajgiri , Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Commissioner Malkajgiri Municipal Council, Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENT 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus direct the respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated November 2004 within four weeks from today and consequently declare the inaction of the respondent in considering and the Representation of the petitioner dated November 2004 as bad in law and Violative of Rule 3 & 4 of A.P Municipalities (Alteration of Ownership of Property in Assessment Books) Rules, 1966. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY & ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent : MR.POLISETTI RADHAKRISHNA (SC FOR MPL) The Court at the stage of admission made the following : ORDER: The petitioner states that she is the absolute owner and possessor of Ac.2.00 cents of land in Plot No.50 in Sy.No.278 of Neredmet Village, Malkajgiri Municipality, Malkajgiri, Rangareddy District. It is alleged that some of land-grabbers have been proclaiming title in respect of the said land on the basis of certain bogus municipal numbers and have been interfering with her possession and enjoyment of the land in Sy.No.278. In the circumstances, she made a representation bringing to the notice of the respondent – The Commissioner, Malkajgiri Municipal Council, the abovesaid facts and requesting to take the necessary action in accordance with law against the said land-gabbers whose names have been specified thereunder. The said representation was received in the office of the respondent on 17-12-2004, however the respondent failed to take any steps. Hence, this writ petition. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Municipality, 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 respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, if not already passed, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. __________ 21.03.2005 sh To 1) The Commissioner Malkajgiri Municipal Council, Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District. 2) 2 CD copies 3) 1 CC to MR.POLISETTI RADHAKRISHNA