Dismissed

Taher Ali Khan v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Telangana HC6 Jan 2012WP/34705/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This disposable order dismisses a writ petition challenging the respondents' insistence on a No Objection Certificate for document registration. The court directed the respondents to process the petitioner's submissions without such certificate, relying on precedent that objections from joint collectors are not sole grounds for rejection.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to take appropriate decision on documents without insisting for No Objection Certificate from Revenue Authorities.

Taher Ali Khan Vs The Greater Hyderabad… — Municipal and Town Planning | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶4

WRIT PETITION No.34705 OF 2011

Date:06-01-2012

Between

Taher Ali Khan

… Petitioners And

¶9

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner and others.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶12

WRIT PETITION NO.34705 OF 2011

¶13

O R D E R:

¶14

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Mandamus declaring that even after the 1^st respondent granted permission vide permit No.6/4 and File No.0892/CSE/TP9/2007 dated 02-07-2008 in favour of the petitioner, the 3^rd and 4^th respondents are insisting for No Objection Certificate from the 2^nd respondent as illegal and arbitrary and a consequential direction to the 3^rd and 4^th respondents not to refuse registration of documents in respect of premises bearing MCH No.3-4-851, Khaiban Barkatpura, Hyderabad.

¶15

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶16

Sri C.Damodar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for

¶17

respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 5.

¶18

3. The question involved in this Writ Petition is no longer res integra. This Court in Hyderabad Potteries Private Limited V. Collector, Hyderabad District and anothe r^[1] and District Collector V. N.Krishna Mohan^[2] , having considered an identical question, held that the Commissioner shall not reject the application of the petitioner solely on the basis of objection purported to have been raised by the Joint Collector.

¶19

4. In the light of the analogy as laid down in the above decisions, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents

¶20

3 and 4 to take appropriate decision on the documents submitted by the petitioner seeking registration, without insisting for production of ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the Revenue Authorities. The objection, if any, raised by the Revenue Authorities may also be taken into consideration along with the other relevant material available on record. No costs.

¶21

____________ K.C.BHANU, J

¶22

January 06, 2012. KTL

¶23

1. 2001(3) ALT 200

¶24

2. 2000(3) ALT 225

Taher Ali Khan v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Taher Ali Khan v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alapati Chiranjeevi Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

L. Vidya Sagar Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

P. Manitha, Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

A.Mahesh Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

S.Ashok, Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

M/s. Radeep Services, a Singapore Company, Vs The Principal Secretary, Forests and Environment