M.Sudhakar Yadav v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ***** W.P.No.21963 of 2015 Between:

M. Sudhakar Yadav ... Petitioner/Appellant (s) And The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep. by its Commissioner and 3 others ... Respondent (s) DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 15.07.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

Yes/No Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reports/Journals Yes/No Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

Yes/No HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY W.P.No.21963 OF 2015

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the respondents in not taking any action on the representations dated 29.06.2015 and 09.07.2015 filed by the petitioner to stop or demolish the illegal and unauthorised construction made by the 4th respondent in the premises bearing No.3-2-692/1 situated at Rahamathbagh, Chappal Bazar, Kachiguda, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action. The case of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner of the premises bearing No.H.No.2-3-693, Rahamathbagh, Chappal Bazar, Kachiguda, Hyderabad admeasuring 148 sq.yards having purchased the same through registered sale deed. While so, the 4th respondent claiming to be the owner of the house property bearing No.

3-2-692/1, western side of petitioner's house, started illegal construction without obtaining permission from GHMC and without maintaining set backs. Against the same, the petitioner made representations on 29.06.2015 and 09.07.2015 to the respondents. As no action has been taken, the present writ petition is filed.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Keshava Rao, learned Standing counsel for the respondents. Since it is stated that the representations filed by the petitioner on 29.06.2015 and 09.07.2015 are pending consideration with the respondents, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the same and thereafter take action in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the 4th respondent.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J Date: 15.07.2015 dv