Disposed

Mohd. Jahangir Ali v. The Government of A.P.

Telangana HC29 Dec 2008WP/28477/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged inaction and stop construction order via writ under Article 226. Court disposed petition by directing submission of revised plan within 10 days. Respondents to consider it within two weeks. Pending this, petitioner restrained and authorities barred from causing inconvenience.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit revised plan and documents within 10 days. Respondents to consider approval within two weeks after submission. Pending, petitioner restrained from construction and author

Mohd. Jahangir Ali Vs The Government of A.P. — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 28477 of 2008

¶5

Between: Mohd. Jahangir Ali S/o. Mohd. Yousuf Ali R/o. H.No. 16-7-768, Chaderghat, Hyderabad.

¶6

..... PETITIONER

¶7

AND

¶8

1 The Government of A.P. Department of Municipal Administration & Urban Development Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶9

2 The Greater Municipal Corporation Rep. by its Commissioner Hyderabad.

¶10

3 The Asistant City Planner Circle No. IV, South Zone Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.

¶11

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶12

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 or Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus questioning the in-action on the part of the respondents in considering the representation dated 4-12-2008 and passing appropriate orders granting necessary permission in respect of the premises bearing No. 16-7-768, situated at Chaderghat, Hyderabad, in pursuance of the orders passed in W.P.No. 25841/2008 dated 26-112008 of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300 - A of the Constitution of India and consequently declare the proceedings in letter No. 768/A.C.P/C4/RW/G.H.M.C./2008 dated 8-12-2008 issued by the 3rd respondent directing the petitioner to stop the construction activity in premises bearing No. 16-7-768 situated at Chaderghat as null and void.

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.KESAVA RAO

¶14

Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV.

¶15

The Court made the following :

¶16

ORDER

¶17

On an earlier occasion, the petitioner earlier approached this Court and filed writ petition No.28478 of 2008 and the same was disposed of in the following manner.

¶18

“As it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is only attending the patchwork, but not authorized construction, he may approach the respondent Corporation by producing the approved plan, dated 24.2.1977, and after obtaining necessary permission, he may complete the required construction/patchwork.”

¶19

Despite the fact that the petitioner approached the authority and gave a representation annexing the building plan dated 24.2.1977, the respondents are interfering with the construction/patchwork, which is being made by the petitioner and hence, he approached this Court and filed the present writ petition.

¶20

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at the admission stage in the following manner.

¶21

The petitioner is hereby directed to submit a revised plan within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, with all necessary documents establishing the title etc., and when such a revised plan is submitted, the respondent-authorities may consider the same keeping in mind the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and pass necessary orders within a period of two weeks thereafter. Pending consideration of the same, the petitioner shall not proceed further with any sort of construction and the respondents also shall not cause any inconvenience to the petitioner.

¶22

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶23

29-12-2008

¶24

Note: Issue CC by 10 days. (B.O)rkk

Mohd. Jahangir Ali v. The Government of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Jahangir Ali v. The Government of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nuvvula Srinivas Vs Government of Andhra pradesh

Manikyam Vs The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal

Hatkari Nagamma Vs The Divisional Forest Officer

Sri Sashi Mohan D. Joshi Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

J. Narender Vs Osmania University rep. by its Registrar

Penumatsa Venkata Satyavathi Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh