Dismissed

Mrs. P Sharada v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Jun 2021WP/10086/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Writ Petition No. 10086 of 2021, the High Court of Telangana dismissed the petitioner's petition for withdrawal with liberty to pursue alternative remedies. The writ challenge against illegal construction by a third party was disposed of by the withdrawal.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the Writ Petition allowed. Liberty to avail alternative remedies granted. No order as to costs.

Mrs. P Sharada Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 1 0 086 0F 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mrs. P Sharada, w/o P Sachin, Aged about 38^years, Occupation. Private Employee, Rl/o H No^{'1 'l-3-359,} Shabaazguda, Warisguda, Secunderabad Secunderabad ...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, represented By its Principal Secretary^{IVA and UD, TS} Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶11

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, GHMC, represented by^The Commissioner, Lower Tank bund road, Hyderabad

¶12

The Zonal Commissioner, Secunderabad Municipal Circle, GHIr/C,^{Circle 29,} Secunderabad

¶13

The Assistant City Planner, Office of The The Zonal Commissioner, Secunderabad Municipal Circle No 29, GHIMC, Near,^{lvlaredpally Court} Secunderabad

¶14

tt/ohd Qhuddus, S/o not known to Petitioner, Aged Major,^{Occ. Business, R/o H.}

¶15

No 1 1 -3-357/1 8/3, Shabaazguda, Warisguda, Secunderabad

¶16

...RESpONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 oI the Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{HighCourt may be pleasedto} issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more in the^nature of^Mandamus, declaring the inaction of respondents more^{particularly that of respondents 3 and 4 in} riot initiating any action on petitioner's written complaint dated^{O1 .04.2021against} respondent No 5 who is making illegal constructions in^{Plot with H. No11-3-35711813'} Shabaazguda, Warisguda, Secunderabad in deviation^{to sanction plan vide Permit} No. 3/C29l0377012021 dated 13.03.2021 without there being any^{permission obtained} from official respondents that too during Lockdown^period, contrary^{to the Judgment} of Honorable Supreme Court of lndia in Civil Appeal^No 33471112^{dated29.02.2012} as being as being lllegal, Arbitrary Un Constitutional, being^{violative of Articles 21 and} 3004, against the Letter and spirit of Catena of^{Judgmentsrendered by this} Honorable Court as well that of Honorable Supreme Court of^{lndia apart from being} violative of principles of natural Justice and Fair^{play, and consequently demolish the} illegal structure raised

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying thatⁱⁿ the^{circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in suppo( of the^petition, the^{High Courtmay be pleased to direct} respondents 2 to 4 to ensure action on respondent^{no 5 from proceedingany further} with illegal construction over and above the^Plot with^{H. No'1 1-3-35711813'} Shabaazguda, Warisguda, Secunderabadⁱⁿ deviation^{to sanction plan vide Permit} No. 3/C29l0377012021 dated 13.03.2021^{in pursuant to complaint dated01.04.2021} against respondent No 5,^pending the disposal of^{presentwrit petition}

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.SHEKAR

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP^{FORMUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND} URBAN DEVELOPMENT

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to⁴ : SRI^{CHATLAMADHU, SC FOR GHMC} Counsel for the Respondent No.5^: -

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE A.ABHISHEI( REDDY

¶25

WRIT PETITION No. 10086 of 2021

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Mr. M. Sekhar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has addressed a ietter, dated 15.06.2021., to the Registry seeking withdrawal of the Writ Petition with liberty to avail alternative

¶28

remedies available under law.

¶29

Permission is granted

¶30

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn

¶31

granting liberty as prayed for.

¶32

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶33

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

SD/.I.NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶35

//TRUE COPY// GP

¶36

¶37

SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To 1. One CC to Sri M.Shekar, Advocate IOPU9]

¶39

i. i;; dd.'io^{Gc f"l Mrni'.iiii na,iiiriiitratiohand Urban Development, Hish court} for the State of^{Telangana at Hyderabadlou l-l-.} . ^ 3. o;; cC6'sri^{cnatta-Madhr,sc for GHMC (oPUC)}

¶40

Two CD Copies

¶41

One Spare^CoPY Kj

HIGH COURT

DATED:1810612021

ORDER

c s T, It
q
2 B JuN 2821
L) .E
*
n

¶46

WP.No.10086 of 2021

¶47

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS.

¶48

Mrs. P Sharada v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. P Sharada v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. v. v.Rajendra Prasad Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Thota Devender Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. G.K.R.S. Properties LLP Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd Afzal Khan Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Rameshethy Baswanth Vs The State of Telangana

Hameed Pasha Vs The State of Telangana