Disposed

Abdul Hameed v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Jun 2021WP/13407/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by an absolute owner of land against the Ramagundam Municipal Corporation for not considering his representation seeking revocation of permission revocation orders. The Court directed the Corporation to consider the pending representation, afford a hearing, and pass orders within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of directing the respondent to consider the pending representation, afford a hearing, and pass orders within four weeks.

Abdul Hameed Vs The State of Telangana — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

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

¶2

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

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 13407 OF 2021

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

Abdul Hameed, S/o Nasar l/ohammed, Age. 53 Years, Occ. S.C.C. Employee, Fi/o.Qr.No. T2-881 , 8'n lncline Colony, Godavarikhani, Ramagundam It/andal, Peddapalli District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, represented by^{its Principal Secretary to the Munlcipal} Administration, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶11

The Ramagundam Municipal Corporation,^{Representedby its Commissioner'} Ramagundam Proper and Mandal, Peddapalli District.

¶12

...RES'ONDENTS

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the HighCourt may be pleased to} issue an order or direction more^{particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamusor} any other appropriate writ declaring the^{action of the respondent No.2, in not passing} any orders considering the representation^{submittedby the petitionerdated.} 26.05.2021, for revocation of the revocation^{orders passed by the respondentNo.2'} dated. 03-04-2021 , revoking the^{permissiongranted to the petitionerdated.} 26.03.2021, when the^petitioner is absolute^{ownerand possessorof his plot of land} admeasuring 161.33 Sq.Yds equal to 134.89^{Sq.N/trs (near H.No.21-2-183and} 21-2-180) in Sy.No. 595, situated at^{MarkendayaColony interiorroad, locality of} Janagaon Revenue Village, Ramagundam^{Municipal CorporationLimits, purchased} the same through registered sale deed,^{is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null andvoid} and violative of^principles of natural^{justice and also violative of the provisionsof} Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 and also^{violative of Articles 14, 19' 21 and 300-A} of the Constitution of lndia. Consequently^{direct the respondent No.2,to consider the} representation of the petitioner dated. 26-05-2021, and^{pass appropriate orders, for} revocation of the revocation orders^passed by the^{Respondent No.2,dated} 0310412021. md ta FG

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances^{stated in the} affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High^{Court may be pleased to directthe} respondent No.2, to consider the representation of^{the petitioner dated.26-05-2021} ' and^pass appropriate orders, for revocation^{of the revocationorders passed by the} respondent No.2, dated. 03-04-2021

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K.VENUMADHAV

¶17

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

¶18

Counsel forthe Respondent^{No.2:SMT M'BHAGYASRI}

¶19

S.C. FOR RMC

¶20

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶22

WRIT PETITION No. 134 of 20

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1, and Smt. M. Bhagyasri, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Ramagundam Municipal Corporation. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

¶25

Aggrieved by the inaction of respondent No.2 in considering the representation made by the petitioner on 26.05.202'1, the present writ petition is filed.

¶26

Having regard to the fact that the representation of the petitioner is already pending before respondent No.2, without going into the merits or demerits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 26.05.2021 and pass necessary orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, duly affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. A copy of the order that may be passed by respondent No.2 shall be communicated to the petitioner.

¶27

Miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶28

Sdi.I.NAGA LAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/'

SECTION OFFICER

1 The 9.ommissioner, Ramagundam Municipal Corporation, Ramagundam proper and Mandal, Peddapalli District.

¶33

2 One CC to Sri K.Venumadhav, Advocate IOPUCI 3 fwg^{CC-9 t9 GlJoy Municipal Administratibnand'Urban Development, High Court} f,or the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶34

1. One CC to Smt M.Bhagyasri, SC for RMC (OPUC) 5. Two CD Copies 6. One Spare cop Kj. )"

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1610612021

ORDER

irE SI4
.1,
J
I
oa 21 JUlr 2fl21 i

¶40

WP.No.13407 of 2021

¶41

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. @ -t>^b

Abdul Hameed v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Hameed 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

M/s. Aishwarya Infra Vs Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority

Mohammed Jahangir Vs The State of Telangana and 10 others

Srinivas Sajjanapu Vs State of Telangana

Sri Pallapu sanjiv Vs The State of Telangana

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

Panja gutta Hindu Smashana Vatika Parirakshana Samithi and another Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others