Judgment :- 1. The petitioner seeks writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 1.8.2011 and to take appropriate action. 2. The petitioner is a resident of No.1/132, V.O.C. Street, Chithalapakkam, Chennai – 600 073 and he is said to have purchased the same in the year 1999. The grievance of the petitioner is that his neighbours Dhanapal and Elumalai are causing disturbance and that they are threatening the petitioner without any rhyme or reason. In this regard, the petitioner is said to have given a representation on 1.8.2011 seeking protection for his person as well as his property. Stating that the 2nd respondent has not taken any action on his representation, petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3. Heard Mr. R. Balachandran, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Mrs. T.P. Savitha, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents. The learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents has stated that the petitioner has not made out any specific allegations and in the absence of specific allegations, 2nd respondent cannot be faulted. 4. By perusal of typed set of papers, it is seen that on the petitioner's representation dated 1.8.2011, the 2nd respondent had issued a receipt in C.S.R.No.367/2011 dated 23.05.2011. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the 2nd respondent is directed to look into C.S.R.No.367/2011 dated 23.05.2011 and dispose the same in accordance with law after giving due opportunity to the petitioner and also his neighbours viz., Dhanapal and Elumalai. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. 5. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. However, there is no order as to costs.