Disposed

Messrs. Namra Constructions, v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC13 Aug 2015WP/12290/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging a demand notice, the High Court directed that the notice be treated as a show cause notice. The Court granted two weeks for a reply and eight weeks for the Chief City Planner to decide after the reply, keeping merits open for future proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Treated demand notice as show cause notice; granted two weeks for reply and eight weeks for decision by Chief City Planner after hearing.

Messrs. Namra Constructions, Vs State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶3

¶4

W.P.No.12290 OF 2015

¶5

Between:

¶6

M/s Namra Constructions, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Mr.Mahammed Waliullah Khan

¶7

….Petitioner

¶8

A n d

¶9

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad. and another

¶10

….Respondents

¶11

DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 13.08.2015

¶12

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

¶13

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE

¶14

AND

¶15

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶16

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No

¶17

may be allowed to see the Judgments?

¶18

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No

¶19

marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

¶20

3. Whether their Ladyship/Lordship wish to Yes/No

¶21

see the fair copy of the Judgment?

¶22

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE

¶23

AND

¶24

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶25

W.P.No.12290 OF 2015

¶26

ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

After having perused the prayer made in the writ petition and other material placed before us, we made certain suggestions to learned counsel for the parties and, on instructions, they have agreed for the following order:

¶29

i. The impugned demand notice dated 23.03.2015 be treated as show cause notice, to which petitioner is allowed to file their reply within a period of two weeks from today.

¶30

ii.

¶31

On receipt of the reply, the Chief City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation shall decide the show cause notice, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the reply.

¶32

iii. If the order is adverse to the petitioner, it would be open to them to take appropriate remedy against such order, if they so desire and advised. All contentions on merits are kept open.

¶33

Writ petition is disposed of.

¶34

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, also stand disposed of.

¶35

DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ

S.V.BHATT, J

Date: 13.08.2015

Note:

Furnish CC in two days.

¶40

Stp/Lrkm

Messrs. Namra Constructions, v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Messrs. Namra Constructions, v. State of Telangana

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

Muliki.Sambaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh. Rep.by its Principal

Mahaboob Basha, S/o.Late Y.Sattar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary

K.Narsa Reddy, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Bala Padmaja Sirisha Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Assistant Divisional Engineer, Vs institution of Lokayukta for the state of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.a.Srilaxmi, Vs Kurnool Municipal Corporation