Smt. M.Rajeshwari v. The State Of Telangana Rep. By The Principal Secretary,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.46336 OF 2016 Dated:02.01.2017 Between:

Smt. M. Rajeshwari, W/o. M. Kishan Rao, Aged about 72 years, R/o.H.No.1512, Valley View, Road No.12, Banjarahills, Hyderabad .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and another .. Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.46336 OF 2016 ORDER:

Heard. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission. 2.

The petitioner alleges that she is the absolute owner and possessor of the agricultural land admeasuring Acs.3.00 in Survey No.158/AA situated at Sahebnagarkalan, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. She further alleges that there is a dispute regarding the said land. By placing reliance on the earlier orders of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, dated 10.05.2016, communicated to the petitioner, the petitioner filed a representation, dated 03.12.2016, before the 2nd respondent seeking implementation of the said order. This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner alleging inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in disposing of the said representation.

3.

As seen from the record, the representation was made by the petitioner on 03.12.2016. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is deliberate inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in considering and disposing of the representation. Further, it is also to be noted that to seek enforcement of the orders, dated 10.05.2016, of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner took six months time and therefore the 2nd respondent cannot be blamed for not disposing of the representation within four weeks. 4.

In the circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the representation, dated 03.12.2016, submitted by the

petitioner and pass appropriate orders, as warranted by law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that there is no expression of opinion by this Court and if any third party rights are affected in the process of consideration of such representation, they shall be put on notice and shall be given due opportunity to submit their case before passing any adverse orders against them. This order, however, does not preclude the 2nd respondent from taking necessary action, if there is any illegal action by the petitioner, before considering the representation. 5.

With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

____________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J Date:02.01.2017 KH