Petitioner sought mandamus against GHMC for inaction regarding unauthorized constructions by Vamsi Developers. Court found action taken per counter affidavit and dismissed petition as redundant.
No direction issued as the matter had already been addressed by the 1st respondent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 26329 of 2007
Between:
Mohammed Abdul Razaak Qamar S/o.Late Shaik Dawood R/o.Himayatnagar, Hyderabad
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation circle -VI, Rep.by its Commissioner, Hyderabad 2 The Vamsi Developers, rep.by its Managing partner Sri M.Y.Maharshi,C/o. M.Y.M.Technologies Ltd, M.Y.M.Money Centre, Door No.3-6-269, 4th floor, Opp:Telugu Academy, Himayatnagar Hyderabad
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particualrly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not taking action against the 2nd respondent by restraining him from making any illegal, and unauthorized constrcutions by deviating the approved plan at building bearing Municipal Nos.3-6-269, 3-6-269/A, 3-6269/B, situated at Himayatnagar, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary, and unjust and consequently direct the 1st respondent to ensure not to make any illegal, or unauthorzed constructions by the 2nd respondent at the said building and demolish the illegal, constrcutions made by the 2nd respondent recently and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.CHIDAMBARAM
Counsel for the Respondent No.: R.RAMACHANDRA REDDY,SC FOR MCH 1,2,4&6
The Court made the following :
O R D E R :
This writ petition has been filed by Mohammed Abdul Razaak Qamar assailing the inaction of the 1st respondent- Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation represented by its Commissioner, Hyderabad on the representation submitted by him with regard to unauthorized constructions made by the 2nd respondent-Vamsi Developers rep. By its Managing Director.
Despite notice to 2nd respondent, 2nd respondent did not chose to enter appearance either in person or through a counsel.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for 1st respondent-GHMC.
1st respondent filed counter affidavit. It is stated in the counter affidavit that necessary action has been taken with regard to removal of constructions made by 2nd respondent by deviating the sanction plan. Para 6 of the counter affidavit reads as under:
“ 6. As stated supra, acting upon the complaint made by the petitioner the respondent Corporation has removed the deviations as stated supra and as on today no further construction is going on. As and when any complaint about further construction is received/noticed the respondent Corporation would initiate appropriate steps.”
Since action has been taken by 1st respondent basing on the report submitted by the petitioner, no further direction need be issued. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as redundant. No costs.
8th July, 2008. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) tnb
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
// TRUE COPY //
SECTION OFFICER
To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies
Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.26329 OF 2007
8TH JULY 2008.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohammed Abdul Razaak Qamar
The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation
The Vamsi Developers
B.Seshasayana Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
