Dismissed

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

Telangana HC17 Jun 2021WP/13290/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a municipal corporation's alleged unauthorized land interference for drainage work. Fearing no further interference, the grievance was redressed by directing the respondents to refrain from acting without following legal procedures.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of directing respondents not to interfere with petitioner's possession except in accordance with law.

M/s. G.K.R.S. Properties LLP Vs The State… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 13290 OF 202'l

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. G.K.R.S. Properties LLP, Plot No.103 and^{104,1st Floor, FortuneChambers,} Silikon Valley Layout, lmage Gardens Road, Madhapura,^{Hyderabad-soo081. Rep.by} its Partner Sri G. Srikant Reddy.

¶9

...'ETIT,ONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, represented by its^{Principal Secretary, Municipal} Administration and Urban Development^{Department. TelanganaSecretariat,} BRKR Buildings, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad^{- 5000?2 (TSI}

¶12

2 Bandlaguda Jagir Municipal Corporation,^{representedby ,,. a"H3tJ"J,t3a*r,}

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the High Court may be pleasedto} issue a writ, order or direction more^{particularlyone} in^{the nature of Writ of} lvlandamus by declaring the action of the^{2nd Respondent Municipalcorporationin} coming to the Petitioner's land at 2^pm on^{1110612021and digging a trench along the} southern boundary of the Petitioner's land admeasuring^{Ac.2-21 guntas situatedin} Sy.No.1B/Ali2 of Bandlaguda Jagir^{Village Gandipet Mandal, Ranga ReddyDistrict,} for the purposes of the laying a drainage^{line,without issuing notice to the Petitioner,} as illegal arbitrary, violative of the^{principlesof naturaljusticeand violativeof the} Petitioner's rights^guaranteed under^{Article 300-A of Constitutionof lndia}

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶15

Petition under section^'151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High court may be pleased to directthe} 2nd Respondent Corporation to refrain^{frominterferingwith the Petitioner'sland} admeasuring Ac.2-21^guntas situated^{in sy.No.18/A112 ol Bandlaguda Jagir Village} Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,^{pendingdisposal of the above writPetition}

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.V.^{PRATAP KUMAR}

¶17

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

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent No.2^{: SRI N.PRAVEEN KUMAR}

¶19

S.C. FOR MUNICIPALITIES

¶20

The Court made the following: OROER

¶21

,/C

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.13290 of 2O2L

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No. 1, and Sri N.praveen Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

¶26

In this writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the action of the respondents in trying to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the subject property for the purpose of laying a drainage line, without issuing any notice to the petitioner and following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶27

Learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, states that the official respondents are not interfering with the possession of the petitioner, and in case, if they need to do so, they will do it in accordance with law.

¶28

ln vie."l, of the above made submissions, the grievance ol the petitioner stands redressed and the Writ petition is disposed of directing the official respondents not to interlere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the subject propert),, except in accordance with the procedure established by law.

¶29

The miscellaneous peritions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

SD/.T.TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \V,.-'

¶31

\V,.-'

¶32

SECTION OFFICER

¶33

To 1 The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban^Development Department, State of Telangana, Telangana^{Secretariat, BRKR Buildings,} Tankbund Road, Hyderabad^- 500 022^(TS). 2 The Commissioner, Bandlaguda Jagir Municipal^Corporation.

¶34

¶35

3, One CC to Sri^{M.V.Pratap Kumar, Advocate} [OPUCI ;. i;; CCs to Gp for^{n{uniiipaiAdministration'and Ur6an Development,High Court} for the State of Telangana^{at Hyderabad} [OUT] 5. o;; cC6Sri^{N.Prar""en Kum6r,SC for [/uniCipalities (OPUC)} 6. Two CD Copies 7. One SPare^CoPY Kj \y-\

¶36

HIGH COURT

¶37

DATED:1710612021

¶38

1 rlE s TA i'e
v
co 2 I JUt'12021
t {
D
ir

¶39

ORDER

¶40

WP.No.13290 of 2021

¶41

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶42

b ^,<br>

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. G.K.R.S. Properties LLP 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

Sri Pallapu sanjiv Vs The State of Telangana

Abdul Hameed Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Mande Lalitha Vs Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

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

Sri Thota Devender Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

Manne Mallishwari Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited