Disposed

M. Srikanth Goud, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Mar 2017WP/9021/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A judgment allowing a writ petition challenging the non-processing of regularization application. The court directed authorities to process the application within 12 weeks once the underlying stay was lifted.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed liberty to make fresh representation with disposal order of W.P. No. 18604 of 2016; Respondent to consider application within 12 weeks.

M. Srikanth Goud, Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No.9021 OF 2017

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings dated 20.01.2017, issued by the 2^nd respondent refusing to process the application submitted by the petitioner seeking to regularize his plot bearing Nos.96 to 101, situated at Medchal Village & Gram Panchayat, Medchal District, under the Land Regularization Scheme as notified by the Government of Telangana.

¶4

It is the case of the petitioner that the application filed by him was kept in abeyance only on account of the order dated 16.03.2017, passed by this Court in W.P.No.18604 of 2016.

¶5

Inasmuch as of now W.P.No.18604 of 2016 came to be disposed of by this Court on 16.03.2017, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondent authorities to process the application submitted by the petitioner as the reason for keeping the same in abeyance is no longer existing.

¶6

Learned standing counsel for the 2^nd respondent submits that the respondent authorities have no objection to process the application of the petitioner.

¶7

Considering the narrow controversy in issue, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondent authorities enclosing the copy of the order dated 16.03.2017 in W.P.No.18604 of 2016, seeking regularization of unauthorized constructions, if any in his plots and on such application is being submitted, the same shall be considered and processed by the respondent authorities in accordance with the law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶8

¶9

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶10

_____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM,J

¶11

Date:23.03.2017, Note: Issue cc forthwith. B/o. Gk.

¶12

¶13

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶14

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.9021 OF 2017
23.03.2017

M. Srikanth Goud, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Srikanth Goud, 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

Sree Veera Saiva Sangha, Vs The State of A.P.

Smt.M.Aswini, Vs State of Telangana

M/s Sri Hema Durga Constructions, Vs The State of Telangana

Kappa Parvathi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

T. Ramu Vs The State of Telangana

Revuri Sarojini Devi , Sarojana, Vs The State of Telangana