Dismissed

G. Raveen Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Aug 2015WP/39418/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of writ petition challenging municipal inaction on illegal construction. Earlier interim order directing action against construction was vacated. All issues left open for trial court suit instituted by respondents.

What did the court decide?

Vacated the interim order dated 23.12.2014. All issues raised in the writ petition are left open. Suit pending in trial court.

G. Raveen Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

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

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN

¶3

Present

¶4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.39418 of 2014

¶6

Between:

¶7

G. Raveen Kumar, S/o. Late Srisailam, Aged 32 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.5-4-55, Bhavani Colony, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-30 & another

¶8

.. Petitioners

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶11

.. Respondents

¶12

The Court made the following:

¶13

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶14

WRIT PETITION No.39418 of 2014

¶15

ORDER:

¶16

This writ petition is filed challenging the inaction on the part of the respondent Municipal Corporation with reference to the illegal construction made in the premises bearing Door No. 15-6-615 to 619, to an extent of 101 square feet, situated at Siddambar Bazar, Hyderabad, by the 4^th respondent, even though such construction is made without any approved building permission and not taking action when such illegal construction takes place is arbitrary, discriminatory and obligation of statutory responsibilities. The petitioners also filed material to support their contention that no such building permission was granted.

¶17

2. Having regard to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, this Court, by order, dated 23.12.2014, passed interim order directing the respondents to take appropriate action against the illegal construction in the subject premises made by the 4^th respondent, forthwith pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶18

3. Praying to vacate the interim order, dated 23.12.2014, the 4^th respondent filed W.V.M.P.No.2640 of 2015.

¶19

4. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel filed counter affidavit and along with

¶20

the counter affidavit, the learned Standing Counsel enclosed a copy of the order passed by the VI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dated 12.09.2014, made in I.A.No.547 of 2014 in O.S.No.1624 of 2014, wherein a direction to maintain status quo was passed. It is represented that the said status quo order is extended from time to time and is in operation. The said suit is instituted by the 4^th respondent herein and other owners of the individual shop units in the said building premises alleging illegal interference by the respondent Municipal Corporation in the suit schedule property and alleging that the respondent Corporation is trying to demolish the structures. As noticed above, the said injunction order was granted prior to institution of the writ petition and passing of the interim orders by this Court.

¶21

4. It is also represented that the petitioners, having come to know of the institution of the suit, have already filed application seeking to implead as defendants.

¶22

5. It is seriously contested by both the parties on the issue of building permission. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no building permission was granted, whereas the learned counsel appearing for the 4^th respondent seriously contends that the building permission was already obtained and the construction was made in accordance with the building permission. These are the matters which require consideration by the trial Court where the suit is pending.

¶23

6. Having regard to the fact that the above premises is the subject matter of the suit pending before the VI Junior

¶24

Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, this Writ Petition is disposed of, vacating the earlier interim order granted in W.P.M.P.No.49441 of 2014 on 23.12.2014. All the issues raised in the writ petition are left open and it is open to the petitioners to contest the said suit and prosecute the matter further. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶25

_________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J

¶26

Date: 19^th August, 2015

¶27

¶28

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶29

WRIT PETITION No.39418 of 2014

¶30

Date: 19^th August, 2015

¶31

G. Raveen Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Raveen Kumar 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

K. Venkata Muralidhar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary

K. Venkata Muralidhar, Vs The Commissioner of Endowments

Ivrcl Infrastructures and Projects Ltd., Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Badugu Arjun Rao, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Vazirani Mohini Haresh, Vs The Hyderabad Water Supply and Sewarage Board

Prathapaneni Babu Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh