Disposed

Sree Vijayawada Gosamrakshana Sangham v. the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation rep by its

Telangana HC18 Mar 2016WP/8233/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an endorsement conditioning representation consideration on tax deposit. Court, noting interim stay, directed the Municipal Corporation to consider the petitioner's specific representation on merits within eight weeks. Merits contentions kept open.

What did the court decide?

Directing the concerned Officer of the respondent Municipal Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation dated 9.2.2006 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight

Sree Vijayawada Gosamrakshana Sangham Vs the… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE

¶2

AND

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶4

Writ Petition No.8233 of 2008

¶5

Date:18.3.2016

¶6

Between: Sree Vijayawada Gosamrakshana Sangham, Vijayawada.

¶7

…..Petitioner

¶8

And

¶9

The Vijayawada Municipal Corporation, represented by its Commissioner, Vijayawada and another.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶12

Writ Petition No.8233 of 2008

¶13

ORDER:(Per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)

¶14

This writ petition impugns the endorsement dated 18.3.2008, whereby, the respondents have informed the petitioner that their representation against the demand of tax will not be considered unless they deposit the amount mentioned in the notice dated 7.11.2005.

¶15

This Court, while admitting the writ petition on 16.4.2008, granted interim stay. The stay operates till this date. Keeping that in view and considering the impugned endorsement dated 18.3.2008 issued by the 2^nd respondent-Assistant Commissioner, we are satisfied that this writ petition can be conveniently disposed of by the following order:

¶16

“The concerned Officer of the respondent Municipal Corporation shall consider the petitioner’s representation dated 9.2.2006, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Petitioner is directed to produce copy of this order before the concerned authority within two weeks from today, failing which, the representation dated 9.2.2006 shall stand rejected without further reference to the Court.

¶17

It is needless to mention that the concerned authority shall consider the petitioner’s representation dated 9.2.2006, on merits, in accordance with law and in the light of endorsement dated 18.3.2008. Petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order along with copy of the writ petition and annexures before the concerned authority within a

¶18

period of two weeks from today.” With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. All contentions on merits are kept open. Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications shall also stand closed. No costs.

¶19

____________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ

¶20

__________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J 18^th March, 2016

¶21

Pnb

Sree Vijayawada Gosamrakshana Sangham v. the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation rep by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Vijayawada Gosamrakshana Sangham v. the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation rep by its

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

Anjuman-e-Khadimul Muslimeen, Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

K. Bhupani, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. N.Sundeetha, Vs Regional Transport Officer

K.Giridhar, Vs The Regional Transport Officer

St. Marys College of Engineering and Technology, Vs The Deputy Transport Commissioner and Secretary

M/s. St.Rita High School, Vs The State Of Telangana, Rept. By Secretary to Government