G. Siva Lakshmi, v. The State Of Telangana,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO W.P.No.26089 of 2016 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Chatla Madhu, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2.

Petitioner's grievance is that the subject premises has been mutated in the name of her husband who had purchased it on 16-06-2012, that her husband expired on 19-11-2013 and even though the petitioner made application for mutation in her name in the municipal records, no action has been taken by the respondent Nos.2 and 3.

3.

Sri Chatla Madhu, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 states that 2nd respondent will consider petitioner's application dt.18-072016 and communicate decision thereon to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of a cop of this order.

4. Accordingly the Writ Petition is disposed of directing 2nd respondent to consider petitioner's application dt.18-07-2016 and communicate decision thereon to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of a cop of this order. No costs.

5. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is

disposed of. No costs.

6.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO Date: 08-08-2016