The High Court dismissed the writ appeal, directing the registry to list the main writ petition for final hearing instead of deciding on the merits of the stay application via the appeal.
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
WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO : 738 of 2009
(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 17/02/2009 in WP NO : 648 OF 2009 on the file of the High Court.)
Between:
Suresh B. Bapna S/o. Basanti Lal Ji Bapna R/o. 1101, A, Krushal Tower, GM Road, Chamber, Mumbai.
..... APPELLANT
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Appellant: MR.C.M.R.VELU
Counsel for the Respondents: MR.P.RAMACHANDRA REDDY
The Division Bench of this Court made the following : Judgment follows 2nd page
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO : 738 of 2009
J U D G M E N T : (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meenakumari)
The writ appeal is filed against order dated 17-2-2009 passed in WPMP.No. 801 of 2009 in WP.No. 648 of 2009 by the learned single
Judge, whereby the learned single Judge directed to main statusquo obtaining as on 17-2-2009 till the disposal of the main writ petition and further directed not to make use of his building until further orders.
2. The main writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the interference of the respondents with the building constructed on the premises No. 7-2-701, 702, 700 situate at Pot Market, Secunderabad, as arbitrary, illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to apply the GO.Ms.No.901 MA dated 31-12-2007 as amended vide GO.Ms.No.112, M.A. dated 31-1-2008 and to pass such
other suitable orders.
3. When the matter has come up today, the learned counsel for the appellant has argued that by virtue of the interim order passed by the learned single Judge, the appellant was deprived of possession of the property and also not to make use of his building and whether he is entitled for regularization of his constructions or not has to be decided
in the main writ petition.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant-writ
petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter,
we are of the opinion that the main writ petition itself can be directed to
be listed for final hearing, which can suffice the cause in WP.No.648 of
2009. Registry is directed to list WP.No. 648 of 2009 under the caption
“for final hearing”, on 15-7-2009 before the appropriate court on the top
of the list.
5. With the above direction, the writ appeal is disposed of at the
stage of admission. No costs.
_____________________ JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI
____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
10-6-2009 I s L
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal should be disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to list the main writ petition for final hearing.
Suresh B. Bapna
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation
Ms. Justice T. Meena Kumari
Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
