JUDGMENT

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. - This case has been taken up through Video Conferencing via Webex facility in the light of Pandemic Covid-19 situation and as per instructions.

2. The instant petition carries an innocuous prayer i.e. a writ of mandamus to direct respondents No. 1 to 5 to examine the representations dated 11.03.2020, 28.05.2020 and 22.06.2020 (Annexures P-1, P-4 and P-7 respectively).

3. This Court has perused the afore-noticed representations. Apparently grievance of the petitioner is that private respondents No. 7 and 8 have constructed a ramp which the petitioner terms as illegal and which is resulting in some water logging.

4. In the considered view of this Court these are matters which ought not to be agitated up-front in terms of invoking the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

5. Petitioner would have an efficacious alternate remedy which would be open for him to pursue.

6. Confronted with a situation where this Court was not inclined to intervene, counsel seeks withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail of his civil remedy as may be available in accordance with law.

7. Disposed of as with