Disposed

Smt Rashmi Praha Seth v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Apr 2019WP/6840/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed the writ petition directed against the demolition of the petitioners' residential premises converted to commercial use. The court recorded submissions that the respondents failed to consider the petitioners' explanation. Consequently, the petition was disposed of by directing the authorities to consider the explanation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law before

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the Act.

Smt Rashmi Praha Seth Vs The State of Telangana — Municipal and Town Planning | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶2

W.P.No.6840 of 2019

¶3

ORDER

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for the 1^st respondent and learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents.

¶5

This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in proceeding to demolish the petitioners’ premises bearing G-11, G-12 with undivided share of land in the premises of concede apartment bearing Municipal No.6-3-658, Erra Manzil, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶6

The case of the petitioners is that the 3^rd respondent issued notice dated 13.07.2018, under Section 461 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act”), directing them to submit the copies of registered sale deed, sanctioned plan and relevant documents before him and that they had submitted explanation for the same on 03.08.2018. However, without considering the said explanation, the respondents are threatening to demolish their business premises.

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, submits that originally, the petitioners had obtained permission for residential house, but they are running commercial showrooms and that they have not mentioned about the earlier notice issued by the

¶8

CKR, J W.P.No.6840 of 2019

¶9

¶10

respondents. He further submits that the petitioners had approached this Court in order to prevent the respondents from taking appropriate action pursuant to the notice issued earlier. He also submits that without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioners and without passing the orders as mandated under the Act, no coercive step shall be taken against the subject property.

¶11

Recording the submission of the learned Standing Counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider the explanation of the petitioners dated 03.08.2018 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. No order as to costs.

¶12

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶13

_______________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 8^th February, 2019 sj

Smt Rashmi Praha Seth v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Rashmi Praha Seth 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J.Narasimha , J.Narsingh Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Abdul Rahman Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Abdul Mannan Vs The State of Telangana

Damsalpudi Nageswara Rao, Vs The State of Telangana

Dubbudu Narsimha Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Vangala Saidi Reddy Vs State of Telangana