Disposed

Smt. v. Sridevi v State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Aug 2015WP/24153/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed regarding unauthorized constructions and regularization attempts in a residential building. The court disposed of the petition without adjudicating merits, directing the corporation to act on the notice while ensuring due process of law and hearing rights are observed before coercive action.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to be granted relief to avail due process of law before coercive action is taken by the Corporation.

Smt. v. Sridevi Vs State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶2

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.24153 of 2015

¶4

Between :

¶5

Smt.V.Sridevi W/o.Venkateswar Rao, Plot No.1-19-82/A, I-Land Villa, Prashanth Nagar Colony, High Tension Line, Opp.Dr.A.S.Rao Nagar, Kapra, Hyderabad.

¶6

.. Petitioner and State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others. .. Respondents

¶7

DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED : 04.08.2015

¶8

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

¶9

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶10

1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers : Yes / No may be allowed to see the Judgments ?
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be : Yes / No marked to Law Reporters/Journals
3. Whether Their Lordship wish to : Yes / No see the fair copy of the Judgment ?

¶11

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶12

WRIT PETITION No.24153 of 2015

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

The petitioner alleges that open spaces and spaces which were earmarked for parking in the residential apartment building, shops are constructed and unauthorized occupations are made causing lot of inconvenience to the residents of the apartment building and the fire point norms are also not observed, and that there are serious efforts made for regularizing the illegal constructions made and in such an event great prejudice would be caused to the petitioner and other residents. Alleging such illegal constructions being allowed and an attempt is made for regularizing the said illegal constructions, notice was caused on 28.02.2015 to the Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad (2^nd respondent). Alleging that the said notice is not acted upon and so far no orders are passed and on the contrary there was serious attempt to regularize the illegal constructions, this writ petition is filed.

¶15

2. Having regard to the fact that the notice caused on 28.02.2015 is yet to be acted upon, without expressing any opinion on merits, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 2^nd respondent, to consider the said notice and take appropriate decision as warranted by law. It is made clear that since acting on the notice issued on behalf of the petitioner would likely affect the rights of respondents 4 to 12, therefore, before taking any coercive action against the said respondents, the respondent-Corporation shall cause notice and give due opportunity of hearing and after observing due process of law only, any such action can be taken. Subject to observing the due formalities, the entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶16

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶17

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J

¶18

04^th August, 2015. Rds

Smt. v. Sridevi v State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. v. Sridevi 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

Bommathi Ashok, Vs The State of Telangana

S.Srinivasa Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B.Balamukund Rao Vs The Special Officer, Emergency Squad

Smt. a. Nagaratna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mahendra Kumar Jain, Vs Kakinada Municipal Corporation

S.Prasad Vs Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devastanam