Disposed

K.S.R.Srinivas v. The Manikonda Municipality

Telangana HC9 Jun 2021WP/12727/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged interference with their possession and construction activity. The High Court disposed of the writ petition at the stage of admission, directing the petitioner to pay interest, comply with conditions, and submit a representation for further consideration by respondents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay interest, comply with conditions within two weeks, and submit representation; respondents to pass orders within four weeks.

K.S.R.Srinivas Vs The Manikonda Municipality — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A,ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO:12727 OF²⁰²¹

¶6

Between:

¶7

K.S.R.Srinivas, S/o K.Ramachandra Reddy,^{Hindu, aged about 46 years, Occ.} Software Enigneer, Fl/o. Plot No.36, Castle^{Hills, Road No.2' H.No."l0-3-311/} 13/5, Hyderabad.

¶8

Rep. by his GPA Holder Sanna^{Prakash, S/o. Late SannaMuthyalu,.Hindu'.tged} aO6ut,i: years, Occ. Business,^{FVo.Flat No. A-102, Gem Ascentia, Near Hi-Tex,} Khanamet, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONERS

¶10

AND

¶11

The Manikonda Municipality, Rep. by^{its Commissioner, Ranga Reddy District.}

¶12

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy^District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Serilingampally,^{Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.}

¶14

The Hvderabad Metropolitan Development^{Authority (HMDA),Rep.by its} IMetroriolitan Commisdioner, HUDA Complex,^{Tarnaka,Hyderabad.}

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the^{constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiled therewith, the High Court may be pleasedto} issue an appropriate writ, order or direction,^{particularlyone in the nature of Writ of} Mandamus declaring the action of^{the respondents herein In interfereingwith the} possession and construction activity of the^{petitioner in respect of House bearingNo.} b-6-36 ad.easuring 500 Sq.^{Yards situated on Plot No. 36 in Sector-1,E Block in Sy.} No. 125 of Neknampur Village,^{Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,without} following the due^process of^{law as illegal, arbitraryand in violation of Article 300- A} of Conslitution of lndia and consequently^{direct the respondents not to interfere with} the possession and construction^{activity of the petitioner in respect of House bearing} No. 5-6-36 admeasuring 500 sq.^{Yards situated on Plot No. 36 in sector-1, E Block in} Sy. No. 125 of Neknampur^{Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District'}

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 20 1

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{praying thatin the circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High Court maybe pleased to directthe} respondents herein not to interfere with the^{possessionandconstructionactivity of} the petitioner in respect of House bearing^{No. 5-6-36 admeasuring500 Sq. Yards} situated on Plot No. 36 in Sector-|,^{"E" Block in Sy. No 125 of Neknampur Village'} Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,^{pending disposal of the above writ} petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. S SRIDHAR

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: SRl.^{N. PRAVEENKUMAR' SC FOR MC} Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3:^{GP FORREVENUE} Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: SRl. Y.^{RAMA RAO, SC FORHMDA}

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISIIEKREDDY}

¶24

WRIT PETI TION^{No.12727of 2O2L}

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Ileard the learnr;d counsel^{lor thc pctllioner, Sri N Pravcen} Kunrar. thc learncd^{StaI-rclingCounscl lorM r-rnicipaiitl'lor} respondent No.i, the^{learncd GovcrnmentPleader tor Revenue for} respondent Nos.2^{ancl 3,and Sri Y,llanri'r Rao, the lc:rrncd} Sturrtling Co,-lnscl lirr' llMl)A^{loIresptltril'' trt Nti''iWith thcir} ('(r1is( nt, lhc \ril pctiLion is disposcct^{<;l irl thc stage ol admissior-l} itsell.

¶27

Aggrievecl by the actiorr^{of the rc:;llotrci( llts in iritc'rlcring,\'jth} the possession of rhe^{pelitiollerover lhehousebearing} Il.N-o.5 6-36, admeasurtng^{500 sq vards' situated in PIot No'36 in} SL-ctor-l, "D" Block in^{SurvevNo. I 25cil' Nek;lampurVillage,} iiir1trrclmrr:lgar Mattcli:1,^{llallga ilr:drii t)is1rict, at-rrl tltr'.} construction activity^{beingundertakenby the petitionertherein,} t.ht prcsent writ petitiorl^{is liled.}

¶28

'l'he learnt cl Stancling (lottlist l, (:)ll ilrslrl-lctions, ltas slaicrl that the pelitioncr^{has paid the neccssarv' lee lor processil.tgtlle} burlrling^{permission applicationon 211,08.2O19 t eot'tc da1'after} ',-lr'-: I.rs. darl,- fui payl'ncnl..^{'l'ht:rt:lbrr:,} it itor:linal^{irlterost :tlIloLr'l} \'.r s icvie(]. it hicl-r thr' Ilc'.iLjoll(^{rhas llt'1 paid illldatcLcitl-r-iccl} Sranclrr-rg Cout-isci htls^{ir-irlhcr slat r:r-i lilr:t the pclitioner u'ersalsi>} <lrrccted to comply^{rvitl'. rheotht',-r conditit>ns pointeclout in the} int irnalion lctter-.^{It.rr:l rs,..,.htpt:lil,ic.)1icrntakosanv rel)l csclltatloll} duly rcporting cornpliartr:e,^{rhe offi<;ialrespondentswill considcr} the sa.me ancl pass^{ilcccssilryorclcrs, in accordance lvith larv}

¶29

¶30

Having regard to lhe above made submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to pay the nominal amount shown as interest levied by the unofficial respondents, comply with the other conditions stipulated in the intimation letter, and make a representation to the official respondents reporting compliance thereof, wlthin a period of two weeks from today. in case the petitioner submits any such representation, the official respondents shall consider the same and pass necessary orders on the building construction applicat.ion submitted by rhe petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a pcriod of four weeks thereof. A copv of the order shall be communicated to the petitioner.

¶31

The miscellaneous pe titions pending, il- anl., shall starrC closed. There shali bc no order as to costs.

¶32

Sd/-I.NAGA LAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY'

V//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 . The Commissioner, Manikonda Municipality, Ranga Reddy District.

¶38

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.

¶39

The Tahsildar, Serilingampally, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4. The Metropolitan Commissioner, Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), HUDA Complex, Tarnaka, Hyderabad.

¶40

One CC to Sri. S Sridhar, Advocate IOPUC]

¶41

One CC to Sri. N. Praveen Kumar, SC for MC [OPUC]

¶42

One CC to Sri. Y. Rama Rao, SC for HMDA (OPUC)

¶43

B. Two CCs to the GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana. (OUT)

¶44

Two CD Copies

¶45

One Spare Copy

gbr

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0910612021

ORDER

1HE sIA
({
t o
/,5e
.3 23,iltit202l
'f.

¶52

WP.No.12727 ot 2021

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶54

<br>

K.S.R.Srinivas v. The Manikonda Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.S.R.Srinivas v. The Manikonda Municipality

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

Bathula Laxma Reddy and 18 others Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Syed Basheer Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Sundeep Gupta Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Nagma Fatima Vs The State of Telangana

G.Madhuri Vs The State of Telangana

D. Janardhan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana