IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 12955 of 2009 Between: Vasupalli Ammoru, S/o. late Marrayya, Hindu, Male, D.No. 36-3-2, Ganganna Nagar, Ward No. 35, (Old 37), K.R. Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam-8 .... PETITIONER AND 1 Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Commissioner, Aseelmetta, Visakhapatnam. 2 Pasupuleti Kasulu, W/o. Sanyasi Rao, Hindu, Female, D.No. 36-3-17, Ganganna Nagar, Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam. ...RESPONDENTS 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 any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 1st respondent in not taking any action against the illegal and unauthorized construction made by the 2nd respondent in Sy. No. 35 (P) D.No. 36-2-17 in spite of refusing the building permission by R-1 dt. 13-01-2004 and in spite of personal requests and written representation dt. 14-05-2009 as illegal, arbitrary, capricious and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the 1st respondent -Corporation to take action for demolition of the illegal construction made by the 2nd respondent after conducting due enquiry or to pass any other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner : SMT.N.(P).ANJANA DEVI, SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 12955 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner herein claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of the building bearing Door No.36-3-2, Ganganna Nagar, Ward No.35 (Old:37) K.R.Kancherapalem, Visakhapatnam-8. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the inaction on the part of the first respondent in considering the representation dated 14.05.2009 made by the petitioner complaining about the alleged illegal and unauthorized constructions being made by the 2nd respondent in Sy.No.35 (P) D.No.36-2-17, Kancherapalem, Visakhapatnam, as arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent- Corporation. The material on record shows that the representation/ complaint of the petitioner sent by registered post was received in the office of the 1st respondent on 15.6.2009, as can be seen from the copy of the postal acknowledgment. In the said circumstances, the first respondent is bound to consider the representation/complaint and make necessary enquiry into the alleged illegal and unauthorized constructions being made by the 2nd respondent and appropriate action is expected to be taken in accordance with law. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as to the correctness of the allegations made, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation/complaint of the petitioner dated 14.5.2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to the 2nd respondent to rebut the allegations. Such an exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI, J Dt.01-07-2009 Note:- Issue C.C in 3 days (B/o) RAR THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 12955 of 2009 DATED : 01-07-2009