K. Anuradha v. The Nizamabad Municipal Corporation
Case brief
What is this about?
In a writ petition challenging proceedings and a notice under Section 452 of the GHMC Act, 1955, as arbitrary and issued without a hearing, the petitioner's counsel submitted that no orders were required to be passed, resulting in the closure of the matter without any order.
What the court decided
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY
Writ Petition No.35825 of 2012
Date: 03-08-2015
Between:
K. Anuradha
.... Petitioner
AND
The Nizamabad Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commisioner, Nizamabad
.... Respondent
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.35825 of 2012
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus declaring the proceedings No.UC/13/TPS-1/2011, dated 15-11-2012 and the notice dated 04-02-2012 issued by the respondent Corporation without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without considering the explanation given by the petitioner dated 30-01-2012 to the notice issued under Section 452 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and proposing to demolish the small parts of the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner represented that no orders need be passed in the present writ petition.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a mandamus declaring proceedings illegitimate should be passed under the circumstances presented.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K. Anuradha
- respondent
The Nizamabad Municipal Corporation
Coram
A. Rajasheker Reddy
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/35825/2012
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court