ORDER : T. VINOD KUMAR, J. This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, more particularly respondents No.2 to 5, in not taking any action against the 6 th respondent, who is making unauthorized/illegal construction of Ground + 5 Upper floors and proceeding to make construction of additional floors without any permission in respect of H.No.6-3- 1177/A/120 & 6-3-1177/A/104, situated at Hussain Nagar Colony, B.S.Maktha, Begumpet, Hyderabad, against the GHMC Rules & Regulations, and without maintaining the mandatory setbacks, as being illegal, arbitrary, unauthorized and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri K.Siddharth Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 5, Sri B.Kishanlal, learned counsel, who stated that he has been instructed to appear on behalf of the 6th respondent, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage. 3. Petitioner contends that the unofficial respondent No.6, who is his neighbour and owner of house bearing No.6-3-1177/A/120 & 6-3-1177/A/104, Hussain Nagar Colony, B.S.Maktha, Begumpet, Hyderabad, is making construction of a building consisting of Ground + 5 Upper floors without having any valid permission or sanction from the respondents-authorities, and also not maintaining any mandatory set backs in terms of G.O.Ms.No.168, MAUD, dt. 07.04.2012. 4. Petitioner further contends that on noticing the aforesaid construction undertaken by the unofficial respondent, he had approached the respondents-authorities and submitted a representation on 29.08.2023 bringing to the notice of the respondents-authorities, the unauthorized and illegal construction made, and sought for initiation of action against the said construction. 5. Petitioner further contends that in spite of the petitioner submitting the aforesaid representation, no action has been taken and on the other hand, the unofficial respondent is now proceeding to make further construction of two additional floors in the subject property, thereby making the entire construction as unauthorized and illegal construction. 6. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.2 to 5 submits that one Eswar Sai Kishore had obtained building permission for construction of Stilt + 2 Upper floors in respect of the subject property admeasuring 181.22 sq. yards vide building permit order, dt. 6. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.2 to 5 submits that one Eswar Sai Kishore had obtained building permission for construction of Stilt + 2 Upper floors in respect of the subject property admeasuring 181.22 sq. yards vide building permit order, dt. 04.07.2022; and that upon the aforesaid building permission obtained by the said Eswar Sai Kishore, the authorities have caused verification and issued letter of approval for commencement of work, dt. 12.07.2022. 7. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the respondents-authorities, on receiving the representation from the petitioner, dt. 29.08.2023, have caused inspection and on noticing that the construction is being made in deviation of the sanctioned plan, issued a show-cause notice, dt. 06.09.2203 to Eswar Sai Kishore and thereafter passed a Speaking Order on 03.10.2023. 8. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the aforesaid Speaking Order has been served on the said person through registered post as prescribed under Section 630 of the GHMC Act, 1955 . 9. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that since the said person, against whom the Speaking Order has been passed, did not remove the construction made in deviation of the sanctioned plan to bring the construction in conformity with the building permit order, the authorities have forwarded the said speaking order to the Nodal Officer on 16.04.2024 for taking further action in the matter. 10. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent submitted that the 6th respondent had died on 13.05.2021 and that the said respondent during her lifetime had sold away the subject property to one Nagarjuna, and as such the 6 th respondent is no way concerned with the subject premises and is being wrongly arrayed as a respondent in the present Writ Petition as well as the complaints that are being made to the respondents-authorities. 11. Learned counsel appearing for the 6 th respondent further submits that the petitioner is playing fraud with the Court by arraying a dead person as a party in the Writ Petition as well as making complaints against the said person by approaching the respondents-authorities. 12. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged. 13. 11. Learned counsel appearing for the 6 th respondent further submits that the petitioner is playing fraud with the Court by arraying a dead person as a party in the Writ Petition as well as making complaints against the said person by approaching the respondents-authorities. 12. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged. 13. Though the counsel appearing on behalf of the 6 th respondent submitted that the 6 th respondent is no more and as such, she cannot be arrayed as a party either in the complaint lodged with the respondents-authorities or in the present Writ Petition, having divested of the property, however, having regard to the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf respondents No.2 to 5 that one Eswar Sai Kishore had obtained building permission in respect of the subject property and authorities have initiated action by issuing a show-cause notice and thereafter passing a Speaking Order against the said person, since, on behalf of the 6 th respondent it is claimed that the said respondent has no interest in the subject property, the 6 th respondent even though arrayed as a respondent in the Writ Petition cannot have any grievance against the action initiated by the respondents-authorities. 14. Insofar as the unauthorized and illegal construction made by Eswar Sai Kishore is concerned, since the respondents-authorities have issued a show-cause notice on 06.09.2023 and thereafter passed a Speaking Order on 03.10.2023 holding the subject construction made by the said person to be unauthorized and illegal construction, and the said order attaining finality being forwarded to the Nodal Officer on 16.04.2024 for enforcing the same in terms of the provisions of GHMC Act, 1955 and TS-bPASS Act, 2020 , this Court is of the view that the respondents- authorities are to be directed to take further action against the unauthorized and illegal construction that had been made by the said Eswar Sai Kishore in deviation of the sanctioned plan, in an expeditious manner. 15. Subject to the above observation and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 16. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.