Dismissed

Smt. D. Sujatha, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Jul 2015WP/33308/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for inaction regarding a building construction permission application. The court addressed the defect caused by the lack of Occupancy Rights Certificate and granted the petitioner liberty to re-file representation with the Collector's order for further processing.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to submit fresh representation with Collector's order; Municipality directed to process application within three weeks.

Smt. D. Sujatha, Vs The 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

CASE NO.WRIT PETITION No.33308 of 2014

¶3

Between:

¶4

Smt. D. Suijatha, W/o. P. Naveen Kumar, Aged about 34 years, Oc: House Wife, R/o. H.No.1-3-62/3H, Sunkulamma Mettu, Gadwal, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

AND

¶7

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Secretariat, Hyderabad & another

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 14.07.2015

¶10

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

¶11

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶12

1 Whether Reporters of Local Yes/No newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

¶13

2 Whether the copies of judgment may Yes/No be marked to Law Reports/Journals

¶14

3 Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship Yes/No wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

¶15

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶16

WRIT PETITION No.33308 of 2014

¶17

ORDER:

¶18

According to the petitioner, she intends to construct a building in the property to an extent of 61 square yards in Survey No.695/A4 and submitted an application for permission on 30.07.2014. The petitioner was intimated that there are certain deficiencies in submission of application and the petitioner was asked to submit the documents mentioned therein. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted the documents as requested through her representation, dated 26.09.2014. Alleging that no further steps are taken in pursuant to the said representation, this writ petition is filed.

¶19

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, submits that since the subject property is governed by Occupancy rights Certificate and that there was a reference made to the District Collector, the building application could not be processed further.

¶20

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced a letter bearing No.F2/3059/2014, dated 04.02.2015, addressed by the District Collector, Mahabubnagar, to the Commissioner, Gadwal Municipality, Gadwal, Mahabubnagar (2^nd respondent) informing the petitioner that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gadwal, has validly granted Occupancy Rights Certificate in respect of the subject property in favour of the husband of the petitioner i.e., P. Naveen

¶21

Kumar.

¶22

4. Having regard to the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is granted liberty to submit a fresh representation enclosing the orders of the District Collector within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of such representation, the respondent Municipality shall process the building application submitted by the petitioner along with the re-submission application, dated 26.09.2014, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of the further representation.

¶23

5. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶24

_________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J

¶25

Date: 14^th July, 2015

¶26

Note: Issue C.C. in one (1) week.

¶27

(B/o.) KL

¶28

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶29

WRIT PETITION No.33308 of 2014

¶30

Date: 14^th July, 2015

¶31

Smt. D. Sujatha, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. D. Sujatha, v. The 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

Shaik Chinna Mastan, S/o Kamal Saheb, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its

Ameen Pasha Vs The State Of Telengana Rep By Principal Secretary

Syed Muzaffar, Vs State of Telangana

Kaki Prasada Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

T.Rama Laxmulu S/o Nagaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Sri G.Vijay Kumax,S/o Sri G.Ramoji, Vs The Commissioner