Writ petition by an association aggrieved by inaction regarding alleged illegal constructions and set back violations. Court directed authorities to inspect and take action if violations exist.
Respondents 1 and 2 directed to examine set back violations and initiate action or communicate satisfaction within one month.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.28735 of 2013
Date:23.11.2015
Between: Drapvi Residency Owners Association, Vidyanagar, Hyderabad, reptd by its Treasurer-C.B.Rao
..... Petitioner
And: The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad and three others.
.....Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. S.M.Subhan
Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: Mr. P.Kesava Rao Counsel for Respondent No.3: Mr. Srinivasa Rao Velivela Counsel for Respondent No.4: Mr. T.Rajendra Prasad
The Court made the following: ORDER:
The petitioner, which is an association of an apartment situated adjacent to respondent No.4-school, filed this Writ Petition aggrieved by the inaction of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in acting on its complaints made against the alleged illegal constructions made by respondent No.3, which has let out the premises to respondent No.4 for running a school.
From the respective pleadings of the parties, the only grievance of the petitioner that needs to be addressed is whether respondent No.3 has raised the construction by indulging in set back violations.
Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are, therefore, directed to examine this aspect and if they are convinced that respondent No.3 has not adhered to the prescribed set backs while constructing the building in question, they shall initiate appropriate action in accordance with law within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. In case, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are satisfied after inspection that respondent No.3 has not indulged in set back violations, the same shall also be intimated to the petitioner within the above-mentioned stipulated time.
Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.35678 of 2013 and WVMP.No.757 of 2015 are disposed of as infructuous.
JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
23rd November, 2015 DR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether respondent No.3 raised the construction by indulging in set back violations.
Drapvi Residency Owners Association, Vidyanagar, Hyderabad reptd by its Treasurer-C.B.Rao
The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad
three others
C.V.Nagarkjunaa Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
