Sri S.V.Satyanarayna, v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.39043 of 2015 Date:02.12.2015 Between:

S.V.Satyanarayana, S/o S.V.S.R.V.Prasad ..... Petitioner And:

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, reptd by its Commissioner/ Special Officer, Hyderabad and two others.

.....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. B.V.V.S.Murthy Counsel for Respondent No.3: None appeared The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The petitioner, who claimed to have made a representation as far

back as 08.4.2010 expressing his grievance against respondent No.3 for allegedly encroaching a road, has woken up after five years and filed this Writ Petition for a Mandamus to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to take action against respondent No.3. On the petitioner's own showing, he and respondent No.3 are at logger heads and a lot of litigation has been generated between them. Having kept quiet for five years without even moving respondent Nos.1 and 2 for ventilation of his grievance, the petitioner cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article226 of the Constitution of India. As held by the Supreme Court, before seeking a Writ of Mandamus, the aggrieved party has to first approach the authority concerned seeking justice (See Kamini Kumar Das Choudhury vs.

State of West Bengal) In the light of the above legal position and as the petitioner has failed to move respondent Nos.1 and 2 for appropriate action before filing this Writ Petition, I am not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition at this stage. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.50330 of 2015 shall stand dismissed as infructuous. ____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.