Akshintala Kamalakar, S/O. Seshadri, v. State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.7333 of 2016 ORDER:

Heard Sri Ambati Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri V. Satyam Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent.

The prayer of the petitioner in this case is as under: "For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit the petitioner pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring inaction on the part of 2nd respondent on the petitioner's applications/representations dated 29.07.2012 and 03.12.2015 submitted for regularization of his unapproved plot admeasuring 309 square yards covered by survey No.506 situated in Laxminagar of Karimnagar Municipal Corporation Limits, as illegal, irregular, irrational and amounts to non discharge of legal obligation conferred on 2nd respondent under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Regulation of unapproved and illegal layout Rules, 2007. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to regularize his said plot and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

It appears that the petitioner earlier made an application as long back as in September, 2012, seeking regularization of his unapproved plot in Laxminagar falling under Karimnagar Municipal Corporation Limits. He thereafter seems to have sent a reminder on 03.12.2015. However, it appears that the authorities have not yet taken action thereon. As the authorities concerned are yet to apply their mind to the petitioner's applications, this Court sees no purpose served in entertaining this writ petition for adjudication on merits at this stage. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the Karimnagar Municipal Corporation, the 2nd respondent, to consider the petitioner's applications dated 29.07.2012 and 03.12.2015 in accordance with law and take appropriate action thereon. In the event the petitioner's request for regularization of his unapproved plot is

rejected, the reasons therefor shall be recorded and duly communicated to him. This entire exercise shall be completed expeditiously and in any event, not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR Date:08.03.2016 GJ