Interim direction in a writ petition seeking mandamus against land development plan approval was recorded as complied with, leading to the disposal of the petition with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI
WRIT PETITION No.14788 of 2014
ORDER:
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners seeking verbatim the following relief:
“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, directing the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 not to approve / sanction of the Plan submitted by the Respondent Nos. 6 to 10 herein for development of their lands situated on the Northern side and Southern Side of the lands of the Petitioners herein showing the Petitioners’ land as Road without considering the objections / Representations dated 16.03.2014, 07.04.2014, 05.04.2014 and 23.04.2014 submitted by the Petitioners herein and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 herein to consider the objections / representations dated 16.03.2014, 07.04.2014, 05.04.2014 and 23.04.2014 by giving opportunity of hearing in the interest of justice and pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.”
2. I have heard the submissions of Sri P.Rajasekhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, of the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development (A.P.) appearing for the 1st respondent, of Sri T.S.Venkata Ramana, learned Standing Counsel for Vijayawada Municipal Corporation appearing for the 2nd respondent, of Ms. K.Mani Deepika, learned Standing Counsel for Vijayawada, Guntur, Tenali and Mangalagiri Urban Development Authority (VGTMUDA) appearing for the 3rd respondent, of the learned Government Pleader for Home (A.P.) appearing for the respondents 4 & 5; and of Sri Yogesh Kumar Heroor, learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents 6 & 7. I have perused the material record.
3. On 06.08.2014, this Court admitted the writ petition and granted an interim direction, as prayed for, in W.P.M.P.No.18326 of 2014.
MSRM, J W.P.No.14788 of 2014
2
4. It is represented that the interim order of this Court is complied with and that in that view of the matter, no cause survives for adjudication in the writ petition.
5. Recording the submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI
Date: 31st July, 2018
KL
3 MSRM, J
W.P.No.14788 of 2014
146
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI
WRIT PETITION No.14788 of 2014
Date: 31st July, 2018
KL
Petitioners (unnamed)
1st Respondent
2nd Respondent
3rd Respondent
4th & 5th Respondents
6th & 7th Respondents
M. Seetharama Murti
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
