THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 8600 OF 2010 Date: 13.07.2010 Between: Bashir Shaik ..... PETITIONER AND The Commissioner, Nellore Municipal Corporation, Nellore and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:- THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.8600 of 2010 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not taking any steps despite the petitioner’s representations to stop the alleged illegal constructions being made by the respondents 2 and 3 by encroaching upon the 16 feet joint way between the plots of the petitioner and the respondents 2 and 3 situated on the western side of the petitioner’s plot at Muthyala Palem, now called Aravindnagar Extension, adjacent to Magunta lay out at D.No.23/1150 in survey No.640/2 Nellore Bit 1 as arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent Corporation as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3. The material available on record shows that the petitioner made a representation on 09.01.2010 alleging that the respondents 2 and 3 had encroached upon the 16 feet common way and proceeding with the construction of the building. While denying the said allegations, the respondents 2 and 3 in their counter affidavit stated that they were making the construction in terms of the building permission dated 06.05.2010 granted by the 1st respondent. The plea of the petitioner that there was a 16 feet joint way on the western side of his site has also been specifically denied. The 1st respondent-Corporation in its counter affidavit stated that as the land in question falls in unapproved layout area, no approved pattern of layout roads was adopted by the land owners and therefore the details of roads and joint lanes were not available with the 1st respondent-Corporation. It is apparent from the rival claims made by the parties that the matter involves various disputed questions of fact, which cannot be enquired into by this Court in exercise of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is also relevant to note that Section 450 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporaction, Act 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) empowers the Commissioner to cancel the building permission, if he is satisfied that such permission was granted in consequence of any material misrepresentation or fraudulent statement made by the applicant. Having regard to the power conferred under Section 450 of the Act, I am of the opinion that the appropriate course would be to direct the 1st respondent to make the necessary enquiry into the allegations made by the writ petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petitioner herein is permitted to make a representation before the 1st respondent raising all the objections with regard to the construction on the alleged joint way as well as the building permission dated 06.05 2010 granted in favour of the respondents 2 and 3 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Thereafter, the 1st respondent shall enquire into the objections and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondents 2 and 3. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the representation/objections from the writ petitioner. Till such time, the respondents 2 and 3 shall not proceed with any constructions on the alleged 16 feet road situated on the western side of the plot claimed by the petitioner. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ​ ____________ Date: 13.07.2010 G. ROHINI, J Note: Issue CC of order in three days (B/o) Ivd