Petitioner sought mandamus for demolition of illegal construction by family members on her deceased husband's land. Respondents admitted subsequent permission was granted for construction, leading the High Court to dismiss the writ petition.
Writ petition dismissed; no costs awarded; associated miscellaneous petitions dismissed.
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 Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T,AMARNATH GOUD
WRIT PETITION NO: 4227 OF 2021
Between:
Chintala Shanthamma, W/o. Late Chintala Rama Kotaiah, Aged. 70 years, Occ. Household, Fl/o. Thodellagudem Village and Grampanchayat, Dornakal Mandal, lVlahabubabad District
...pETrroNER
AND
...RES'.NDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleasedto issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, moreparticularly oneln thenature of Writ of tt4andamus to declare the action of the Respondents No. 2 and3 in not taking any action on Petitioners representation dated 0t -02-2021 against theRespondents No. 5 and 6 for illegal construction of a building ln the house sitewhichwas recorded as houseplot bearing No. 3-48 ln the Grampanchayatrecords on the nameof Petitioners deceased husband Chintala Rama Kotaiah situatedat Thodellagudem village and Grampanchayat, Dornakal Mandal, MahabubabadDistrict, without obtaining any permission from the 3rd respondent though thePetitionermade representations to the respondents No. 2 and 3 separately but theydid not takeany action so far as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation ofprinciplesof naturaljustice and violation of articles 14, 19,21 and 300-A of the Constitutionof lndia and violation of provision of section'l 14 of Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018and consequently direct the Respondents No. 2 and 3 to take steps on Petitionersrepresentation dated 01-02-2021 by way of demolishing the illegal constructionof a buildingon the house site of Petitioners deceased husband and further direct the respondentsNo. 1 and 2 to take disciplinary action against 4th respondent whois workingas 3rd respondent for violation of his official duty.
o: 10 20 21 n thecircumstances stated in the PetitionunderSection 151 CPCPrayingthati on,the High Court maY be Pleasedto Pass orders affidavit filed in suPport of the Petiti o takestePSon Petitioners 1to3t forthwithdirectingthe ResPonde nts No olishingthe ongoing illegal byway of dem represconstruentation ctionof a building made dated 01-02-2021bYthe 5th and disPosal6th of the res pondentsmaincaseon the house site of petitioners deceasedhusband' Pending REPAKULA AJ AND RURAL P FORPANCHAYATR CounseI for the Petitioner: SRI NAGE SW ARA RAO CounseI lor the ResPondentNos .1 &2:G PMENT DEVELO Counsel forthe RespondentNos .3 & 4: SRI G' NARENDER REDDY' AYAT SC FOR GRAMPANCH dentNos.5 & 6:- Coun selfor th e ResPone thefoll owing:O RDER TheC ourtmad
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
WRIT PETITION No.4227 OF 2021
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader.
The case of the petitioner is that the un-official respondents are daughter-in-law and grand son of the petitioner. There are disputes within the family. Since the unofficial respondents have proceeded with the construction without obtaining any permission from the concerned authorities, the petitioner objected for the sarne. Hence, this writ petition.
During the argument, learned Government Pleader, on instructions, categorically submitted that there is subsequent development that the Grampanchayat has accorded permission in favour of the un-official respondents for construction of the house, therefore, they are proceeding with the construction authorisedly and the petitioner probably did not aware of that fact.
Recording the above submission, the writ petition is
dismissed. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand di smissed.
Sd/.T. TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTAN REG TRAR ,TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
To,
'l . One CC to Sri Nageswara Rao Repakula, Advocate [OPUC]
sml4-
HIGH COURT
DATED:231Q212021
ORDER
WP.No.4227 of 2021
1t{ STA rA
L\o 0 4 MAR 2021
*
n ic F.AT Cr
DISMISSING THE WP
WITHOUT COSTS
.a- "
fr
0l)
1) 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the action of not taking action upon representation regarding illegal construction warrants issuance of a writ of mandamus.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Chintala Shanthamma
The State of Telangana and 5 others
District Panchayat Officer
Thodellagudem Gramapanchayat
Mr. Chinnuri Sai Teja
Chintala Samarajyam
T. Amarnath Goud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
