IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 28721 of 2008 Between: Y.Sharada W/o.late Y.Dattatri Verma H.No.1-9-860, Adikmet, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 Assistant City Planner, Circle 9, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Opp: GPO, Abids, Hyderabad. 3 G.Srikanth S/o.G.Anjaiah H.No.1-9-859, Adikmet, Hyderabad. .....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 appropriate order, direction or a writ, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the inaction of the respondents in not taking any action against the respondent No.3 and allowing him to proceed with the construction as arbitrary and illegal, and direct the respondent No.1 and 2 to dispose of the application of this petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.DEEPAK MISRA Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6 The Court made the following : ORDER The petitioner approached this Court and filed the present writ petition with the following prayer: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner herein prays that it is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate order, direction or a writ, more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring that the inaction of the respondents in not taking any action against respondent No.3 and allowing him to proceed with the construction as arbitrary and illegal and direct the respondent No.1 and 2 to dispose of the application of this petitioner and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” According to the petitioner, she is the absolute owner of house bearing Municipal No.1-9-860 situated at Adikmet, Hyderabad. The 3rd respondent, who is her neighbour, is making a new construction by dismantling the front portion of his old structure and the said construction is being made encroaching on the road and attempting to open a door in the land, which is the only way to her house, without any permission. The said encroachment on the public road will make the road narrow and the opening of a door in the by- lane will lead to much inconvenience. On that, she made representations to the respondents, especially to the 2nd respondent on 18.12.2008, and another representation on 24.12.2008 wherein the Additional Chief City Planner endorsed on the complaint directing the Assistant City Planner, Circle 9 to inspect and report. But, so far, no action has been initiated. Hence, she filed the present writ petition. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by dispensing with the usual notice to the un-official respondent i.e., 3rd respondent. As the petitioner has submitted several representations, the latest one of which, is dated 24.12.2008, the respondents are hereby directed to consider the said representation and pass necessary orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Now, as this Court is dispensing with the usual notice to the 3rd respondent, the official respondents may put the 3rd respondent on notice and afford an opportunity of personal hearing before passing any orders on the said representation. Till such time, the 3rd respondent shall not proceed with any further construction. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. __________ 30-12-2008 rkk