Dismissed

Mr. Perudi Suresh v. The State of Ts

Telangana HC4 Mar 2021WP/5280/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the construction of a Sewerage Treatment Plant via Writ Petition No. 5280 of 2018 under Article 226. A stay application was filed under Section 151 CPC. The High Court of Telangana dismissed both petitions ex-parte due to the absence of counsel for the petitioners and non-prosecution of the matter.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of Writ Petition No. 5280 of 2018 and stay application pending disposal in default and for non-prosecution without costs.

Mr. Perudi Suresh Vs The State of Ts — Environment and Pollution | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

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

¶2

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF IVARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 5280 OF 2018

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

Mr. Perudi Suresh, occupation Pvt Employee, Resident of plot no 6, beside Krishnaveni school, Padmaja colony, Chandanagar village, Sherilingampally I,4andal, R.R.Dist (500050)

¶8

CMR Residency Flat Owners Welfare Association, CMR residency, opp. MNR high school, Chandanagar Hyderabad. 500050 Rep. by Mr.J. Sundeep, president

¶9

New Shanker Nagar Residents Welfare Association, 1-4012131511 , sy no.23612, 237 and 238, Shankarnagar, phase- 2, Chandanagar, Sherilingampally, Hyderabad 500050 Rep. by Mr B.Sanjeeva, president

¶10

Uday Polygon Ruby Block Welfare Society, 1-3611/12 A, opp MNR school, Reddy colony road, Chandanagar Sharilingampally Hyderabad 500050 Rep. by its president Kahapur Hanmanth Rao

¶11

Uday Polygon Pearl Block Welfare Association, At D No.1-36/1112, opp lo MNR school Chandanagar, Sherilimgampally, Hyderabad 500050. Rep. by its president kothapally sobharani

¶12

Srinivasa Heights Owners Association, Beside MNR school, Reddy colony road, Chandanagar, Sherilingampally, Hyderabad 500050. Rep. by its president Anudeep Reddy

¶13

Uday Emerald Welfare Society, Near MNR high school, Reddy colony road, Chandanagar, Sherilingampally, Hyderabad 500050. Rep./by its president Mr. M. C. Ramulu

¶14

...PETTTTONER(S)

¶15

AND

¶16

The State of TS, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to lMunicipal Administration, Government of Telangana, Secretariat building, Hyderabad.

¶17

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakadikapool, Hyderabad.

¶18

The Hyderabad Water Metro Work Sewage Service Board, rep. Managing Director by having its office at Khairathabad

¶19

The Greater Hyderabad lvlunicipal Corporation, rep. by its commissioner having its office at Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

¶20

¶21

5 The Telanoana State Pollution^{controlBoard, Rep. by its chariman, havingits} - omii" it piti tlo 43, Paryavarana Bhawan, Ivlain Road, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad^- 500018.

¶22

Petition under Article^{226 of lhe constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate writ,^{order or Direction, more particularly onein} ihe nature of^Writ ol^{Mandamus,declare the action of the Respondentswith} regard to constructlon^{of Sewerage Treatment Plant (S.T.P) of 30 It/ L.D capacity} in the tank bed area^(F.T.L) .Mandal,^{in Ac.13-23Gts in sy.No.253 of chandanagar} Ranga Reddy District^{in violationof byelaws of} vitt.g", serilingampally the [reater Hy-aerauaa^{l/unicipalCorporationand law in force in the saidland} deems fir and^{proper under the circumstancesof the casesin the interest of} justice.

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶24

Petition under Section^{151 CPCpraying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed^{in support of the petition, the High courtmay be pleased to} STAy the construction^{of SewerageTreatment Plant (S.T.P)of 30 M.L.D capacity} in the tank bed area^{(F.T.L) in Ac.13-23Gts in sy.No.253 of chandanagar} vittug", Serilingampally'tr/andal,^{Ranga Reddy Districtin violationof byelaws of} the 6reater UfOeraOaO^{Municipal Corporationand law in force in the saidland} pending disposal of the writ^petition

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioners:SRl.^T'NARENDER

¶26

counsel for the^{RespondentsNo. 1: GP FORMUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION&} URBAN DEVELOPMENT

¶27

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo. 2: GP FOR REVENUE}

¶28

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo. 3: SRl. T. SUDHAKAR REDDY, SC FOR} HWMWSSB,

¶29

CounselfortheRespondentNo.4:SRl'SAMPATHPRABHAKARREDDY,Sc FOR GHMC'

¶30

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo. 5: SRI' T. SHIV KUMAR,SC FOR TSPCB'}

¶31

The Court made^{the following:}

¶32

Itenrs No.^I l

¶33

]'I{E }tON'Bt,I.] TIII]^{CHITiF"ItJS'I'tCF],HIMA KOHLI}

¶34

,.\l)

¶35

THE HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICE I]. VIJAYSEN REDDY}

¶36

W.P.N o.5280 of²⁰¹⁸

¶37

ORDER:^{(Per the Horr'l)le the chiefJuslicc llinrn Kohli)}

¶38

The present matter^{was listedon 09.02'2021'However, none} had appearcd tbr the^{petitioners.ln the interest ofjustice,thesame} was adjoumed for^{today to await the presenceof learnedcounsel Ibr} the petitioner.s. None^{is pfcsenl on behall'of the petitioners even today.}

¶39

tt appears lhat the^{pctititrncrs3r!' not interestedir.r prosecuting}

¶40

tho present^{petition,whichis accorrlinglydismissedin defaultand for}

¶41

non-prosecution along^{with the pending applications,ifany'}

¶42

SD/-I.NAGALAKSHMI //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT BEGISTRARg0

¶43

SECTION OFFICER

¶44

To'1. On" CC to Sri. .T' Narender, Advocate tOPUCI 2. One CC to Sri. Sampath^{Prabhakar Reddy,SC tol-GH.tt/Q.(pfUC)} 3. One CC to Sri. T. SudhaXar^{Reddy,SC for HMWSSB (OPUC)}

¶45

One CC to Sri.T. Shiv Kumar,^{SC for TSPCB (OPUC)}

¶46

Two CCs to the GP^{for MunicipalAdministration & UrbanDevelopment'High} Court for the State of Telanqana.^(OUT)

¶47

Two CCs to the GP^{for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana'} (our)

¶48

Two CD Copies.

F-

HIGH COURT

DATED:04/03/2021

ORDER

,).
s TA
1 t{
oo5 2 $ l,lAB 2021 oz
)>

¶55

WP.No.5280 of 2018

¶56

Dismissing the WP ln default and for non-prosecution Without costs.

¶57

,,K,, @

Mr. Perudi Suresh v. The State of Ts

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Perudi Suresh v. The State of Ts

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Y Subhas Vs M Rajesh

Mohd Ghiasuddin Vs Nikhath Fatima

Chaparla Sitaram Vs the State of A.P. Rep. by Advocate General, Hyd.

Sriven Marketing, Vs The Union of India

News item published in Deccan Chronicle Vs State of Telangana and 11 Others

Sri. Kailash Nath P S S Vs Union of India