Tamarana Govinda Raju, v. The Ditrict Collector (Panchayat Wing),

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No.7017 of 2012 ORDER:

No representation for petitioner.

Heard Sri Ravi Cheemalapati for respondents 4 and 5.

The complaint of petitioner is against inaction of respondents in disposing of representation dated 02-01-2012 as illegal and arbitrary.

On 14-03-2012 in W.P.M.P.No.8885 of 2012, the following interim order was passed.

" Heard Sri E. Peddanna, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y. Subba Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri G. Elisha, learned Standing Counsel for Panchayats for respondents 4 and 5.

The representation, dated 02.01.2012, itself refers to the construction in progress and, hence, without the pleadings of the parties before the Court, any interim intervention may not be called for. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that the representation made to the first respondent has not been considered and decided so far, while the construction is attempted to be completed in the meanwhile.

Therefore, the first respondent shall consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner and six others, dated 02.01.2012, in this regard, in

accordance with law, within two (2) weeks from the date of communication of this order.

After perusing the writ prayer and the interim order dated 14-03-2012, I am satisfied the interim order dated 14-03-2012 can be made as final order in the writ petition.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. _____________ S. V. BHATT, J Dt: 23-01-2017 Prv