Allowed

Gandhipuram IV Block Members Welfare v. The Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry

Telangana HC24 Mar 2014WP/14625/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed a writ petition filed by an association challenging the removal of barbed wires from vacant sites earmarked for public use in a defunct cooperative building society. The court directed the respondents not to interfere with the land.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents not to interfere with the vacant sites earmarked for public purposes in the Gandhipuram Co-operative Building Society Limited.

Gandhipuram IV Block Members Welfare Vs The Municipal… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.14625 of 2005

¶3

Date: March 24, 2014

¶4

Between: Gandhipuram IV Block Members Welfare Association, Rajahmundry, Gandhipuram, E.G. District, rep. by its President M. Radhakrishna Murthy. … Petitioner

¶5

And

¶6

1. The Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry, rep. by its Commissioner, Rajahmundry, E.G. District & 2 others. … Respondents

¶7

¶8

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO

¶9

WRIT PETITION No.14625 of 2005

¶10

O R D E R:

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for the respondents.

¶12

2. The petitioner association formed a society by name Gandhipuram Co-operative Building Society, which was registered under Cooperative Societies Act vide Registration No.B.793. The society acquired vast land at Gandhipuram, Rajahmundry, and the layout for 160 plots was approved by the 2^nd respondent. While approving the layout, two vacant sites were earmarked, one is for park which admeasures 110-105 square metres and another is for community hall which admeasures 40-50 square metres. After allotment of the plots, the society has become defunct. The members of the society constructed residential houses and were

¶13

living there. While so, during the year 2005, the officials of the first respondent removed the barbed wires around the said two vacant sites and the petitioner association submitted a representation on 20.06.2005 requesting the first respondent not to interfere with the land. When there was no response from the first respondent, the petitioner association filed the above writ petition.

¶14

3. Even after eight years, no counter-affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2.

¶15

4. In the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents not to interfere with the vacant sites earmarked for public purposes in the Ghandhipuram Co-operative Building Society Limited, vide Registration No.B.793, situated at Gandhipuram, Rajahmundry. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence. No costs.

¶16

________________________________ A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: March 24, 2014 BSB

¶17

00 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO

¶18

WRIT PETITION No.14625 of 2005

¶19

Date: March 24, 2014

¶20

BSB

Gandhipuram IV Block Members Welfare v. The Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gandhipuram IV Block Members Welfare v. The Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry

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

Shaik Khirunnisa Begum Vs The Superintendent of Police

Nallapaneni Venkata Ratnam Vs The District Collector (Cs) Prakasam District.

V.Allvelu, Vs The Govt. of a.P.,rep. by its Secretary, Randb,a.P.

Dr. R. Surender Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Smt Ponnapalli Seetharatnam Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

B.Sreeramulu, Vs The Executive Engineer (Randb) Puttur