Disposed

Shaik Iqbal v. The Grearter Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Telangana HC1 Jul 2009WP/12937/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh issued a writ of Mandamus directing the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation to consider complaints regarding illegal constructions by a third respondent. The court dismissed the case on merits but directed an expeditious inquiry within four weeks after giving the alleged violator an opportunity to rebut allegations.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representations/complaints of the petitioner dated 29.5.2009 and 04.6.2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordanc

Shaik Iqbal Vs The Grearter Hyderabad Municipal… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO : 12937 of 2009

¶7

Between:

¶8

SHAIK IQBAL S/o. Shaik Ahmed H.No.17-4-455 Arabgalli Dabeerpura, Hyderabad

¶9

.... PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation rep. by its Commissioner & Special Officer Office at Tank Bund Hyderabad

¶12

2 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation rep. by its Assistant City Planner, Circle No.4 Sardar Mahal, Hyderabad

¶13

3 Syed Faiyaz Lateff S/o. Late Syed Habeebuddin

¶14

H.No.17-4-465 To 467,472 Arabgalli,Dabeerpura,Hyderabad

¶15

....RESPONDENTS

¶16

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 issue an appropriate writ or order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents No 1and 2 in not taking appropriate action to demolish the projections, obstructions, illegal and unauthorized construction being made by the respondent No 3 at property No.17-4465 to 467,472 & 474 Arabgalli, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad as per the provisions of HMC act 1955 as illegal arbitrary and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.ABDUL NAJEEB KHAN

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: R.RADHA KRISHNA

¶19

REDDY (SC FOR GHMC, SNC ZONE)

¶20

The Court made the following:

¶21

THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI

¶22

WRIT PETITION No : 12937 of 2009

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

The petitioner herein claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of the house bearing Municipal No.17-4-455 situated at Arabgalli, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad.

¶25

This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents 1 and 2 in considering the representations dated 29.05.2009 and 04.6.2009 made by the petitioner complaining about the alleged illegal and unauthorized constructions being made by the third respondent at Property No.17-4-465 to 467, 472 & 474, Arabgalli, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad, as arbitrary and illegal.

¶26

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation.

¶27

As could be seen from the material on record, the representations/complaints made by the petitioner were received in the office of the respondents 1 and 2 on 29.5.2009 and 5.6.2009. In the said circumstances, the respondents 1 and 2 are bound to consider the representations/complaints and make necessary enquiry into the alleged illegal and unauthorized constructions being made by the third respondent and appropriate action is expected to be taken in accordance with law.

¶28

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as to the correctness of the allegations made, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representations/complaints of the petitioner dated 29.5.2009 and 04.6.2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to the third respondent to rebut the allegations. Such an exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶29

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶30

_____________ G.ROHINI, J

¶31

Dt.01-07-2009

¶32

Note:- Issue C.C in 2 days (B/o) RAR

¶33

THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI

¶34

WRIT PETITION NO : 12937 of 2009

¶35

DATED : 01-07-2009

Shaik Iqbal v. The Grearter Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Iqbal v. The Grearter Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bala Prabhakara Rao Vs The State of A.P

Andhra Ball-Badminton Association, Regd.No.545/2004 Vs Ball Badminton Federation of India., A-15, Chandra Mahal

P.Muniswami Reddy Vs The State of A.P

Chataparthi Venkateswara Rao Vs The District Collector

Smt. Zahurunnissa Begum, Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corportion

B.Sita Rama Murthy Vs The Government of Ap