Petitioner sought writs to cancel an appeal order dismissing her construction permit and ownership certificate. Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn at the instance of the parties.
Writ Petition dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Originat Urri"Oicti"nl.^ '
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND rWcr.rrl Or.r-r'
rHE HoNouRor.. S[ts,fJr]cE r.vrNoD KUMAR
Between:
WRIT P ETITION N O: 396 440F 201s
T. Vani, Wo Late tn""l1llq,.tge: abour 46years, Occ: Agricutture, rto Azad Nagar, Makthal Town & Mandat, Mah;bubn;;;r;ffi;i.
AND
...PET|T|oNER
'1 The state of rerangana, represented by its Secretary, Department of panchayat
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction moreparticularly one in thenature ofWrit of Ceritiorari calling the records in Appeal File No:A7140712014fromthe Officeof the 2nd Respondent/ District PanchayatOfficer, Ivlahabubnagarand to set asidethe Proceedings Dated: B-10-20'1 5 issuedby the 2nd Respondent/District Panchayat Officer, Irilahabubnagar inAppeal No: A71407120'14,by and under which he cancelled thepermission accordedto me for constructionof the building videPermit No: A1247t2012, Date.d:20-4-2013 issuedby the Panchayat secretary,Ir/akthal and the consequentialproceedings No: 4/203/2015, Dated:26-10-2015issued by the Panchayat secretary,lr/akthal cancelling ownershipcertificate issuedto me for H.No: B-12211 lo B-122t12and to record the names of the RespondentsNo.4 to 6 as the owners for theshopping complex,declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to lawand the specificprovisionscontained in 5128 and '129 of the Telangana(AndhraPradesh) PanchayatRaj Act, '1994 'and Rule 28 of the A.P.Gram PanchayatLand Development(LayOut and Building Rules)' 2002and has the effect ofviolationof the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner Under/Article 14,19 and 21 of the Constitutionof lndia and consequently directthe 3rd Respondent/PanchayatSecretary, Gram Panchayat' t/akthalto restore the ownership of thepetitionerin respect of H No: 8-12211 to 12'
ll2ll
PMP.No: 1 oF2015 thatin the circumstances stated in Petitionunder Sectlon 151 CPC Praying theaff idavitf iledin suPPort of the Petition' theHigh CourtmaY be Pleasedto direct restorethe ownershiPof the petitionerin respectof H No the ResPondentNo 3 to ed inSY,No.94/E SItu atedat Makthalvillage & Mandal' 8-12211to 12 construct
MahabubnagarDistrict
WVMP .No:4971OF2017
Between:
AND
Nagar,
(Respondents 2 to 5 are not necessaryparties)
...ResPondents
Petition under Section151 cPcpraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supportof the petition,the High court may be pleased to vacate the interim staygranted inW.P.No.51129 12015in W.P.No.3964412015' dl. 07.12.2015.
WPMP. NO: 7983 OF 2017
Between:
B. Raghu Shanker Reddy, S/o B. VenkatReddy,Aged about 44 years, Occ: Business, Rl/o Maktal (V & M), Mahabubnagar District.
AND
/3//
...Respondents
Petition under Order 16-A of Writ Rules, praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to implead the Petitioner herein as one of the Respondent in the W.P.No.39644/2015.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K VENKATESH GUPTA
Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURALDEVELOPMENT
Counsel forthe RespondentNos.3& 7: SRI G. NARENDER REDDY' SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT
Counsel for the RespondentNos.4to 6: SRI NEELI ASHOK KUMAR
Counsel for the ProposedRespondent: SRI K. GOVIND
The Court made thefollowing:ORDER
i I
THE HON'BLESRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
Writ PetitionNo.39 644 of 2OLS
ORDER:
Learned counselfor the petitioneraddresseda letter dt. 18.17.2021 to theRegistrar(Judicial)High Court for the State of Telangana atHyderabad,seeking permissionto withdraw this Writ Petition stating thatthe writ petitioner and unofficial respondents have settledthe matter atthe instance of elders.
SD/.M.SANTHI VARDHANI JOINT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
t/L_---
SEC:TION OFFICER
To,
- One CC to Sri K. Venkatesh Gupta, Advocate [OPUC]
J. One CC to Sri G, Narender Reddy, SC for Gram Panchayat tOpUCl 4. One CC to Sri Neeli Ashok Kumar, Advocate IOPUCI One CC to Sri K. Govind, Advocate [OPUC]
CHR
HIGHCOURT
DATED:2311112021
ORDER
W.P.No.39644 ot2015
1 HT. STA 14:
o
6-
O!) 0I 0Ei2!?1 :il
1!
' . ;r. :'-
.-:. ..-- . r'-"
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS
i WU
T. Vani
The State of Telangana
T. Vinod Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
