Writ appeal dismissed against an order directing GHMC to act on illegal construction allegations. Court found no reason to interfere as notice was issued and opportunity of hearing afforded.
The writ appeal was dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications were closed.
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 STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO
WEDNESDAY .THE TWENTYTHIRDDAYOF IVARCH
TWO THOUSAND ANDTWENTYTWO
PRESENT
HONOURABLE THE CHIEFJUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND THE HONOURABLESRIJUSTICEABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT APPEALNO: 196 OF 2022
writ Appeal under clause15 of the Letters Patent Preferred AgainstThe order Dated1011212021 Passed in w.P.No.2B350 ol 2021 on the file of theHigh Court.
Betwee n:
G.SudheerKumar,S/o.GsNPrasad,Aged32years,occSoftwareEngineer' nyo ?tri tlo. sot,cfraitanyaClassic-2, VenkatrayanaNagar,Nizampet' Hyderabad
...APPELLANT
AND
...RESPONDENTS
lA NO: 1 OF 2022
Petition under Section151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit fited in supportof the petition,the High courtmaybe pleasedto suspend the operationoi orders in WP No. 2835012021 da1ed10.12.2021pending disposal of the mainwrit appealin the interestof justice.
Counsel for the Appellant:SRl.P RAMASHARANA SHARMA Counsel for the RespondentNo. 1: SRl. PONNAM MAHESH BABU counsel for the RespondentNo. 2: GP FORMUNICIPAL ADMN. & URBANDEV. Counsel for the RespondentNos.3 to 5: SRl. SAMPATHPRABHAKAR REDDY, SC FOR GHMC
The Court delivered thefollowing:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH C}IANDRA STIARMA AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT APPEAL No.196 OF 2022
JUDGMENT,per nte ua\ bte the chte/Jtlsnce Safislt Chaadro Shdrna/
The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated lO.l2.2o2l passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.28350 of 2021.
The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the writ petition was preferred by the respondent No.1/writ petitioner alleging some illegal construction in Survey Nos. 1 1/ 11, 1), I 12 and 1 1/ 13 part situated v/ithin the village limits of Khanamet, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition directing the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) to take necessary action in respect of illegal construction, if any.
Paragraph 7 of the order passed by the learned Single Judge is reproduced as under:-
; I I
'7. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Circle 21, Chanda Nagar, West Zone, GHMC, to take necessary action, in respect of subject matter of the writ petition. On filing such an application/ representation, the Deputy Commissionef, Circle 21, Chanda Nagar, West Zone, GHMC, is directed to examine and dispose of the same, in accordance with law, within a period of eight{8) weeks from
1
the date of receipt of application / repre sen tation, after issuing notice and after affording opportunity of hearing to the interested persons including respondent No.5.'
Various grounds have been argued before this Court and it has also been stated that the respondent No. 1/writ petitioner is in a habit of extorting money by filing such writ petitions and the present appellant/ respondent No.S in the writ petition was also not heard in the matter.
The order of the learned Single Judge reveals that notice was issued to respondent No.S therein and thereafter, an order has been passed. The order also reflects that the GHMC has been directed to issue notice to the present appellant also while passing a {inal order in the matter. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Slngle Judge.
Resultantly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
SD/.CH.VENKATESWARU LU DEPUTY REGISTRAR
\
,TRUE COPY'
SECTION OFFICER
To,
PN/
q
HIGH COURT
DAIED:2310312022
1 H E s l4
o
o 1 ? t\AY 2a2? 6t-7-
.c)
*
p,i *
H ED
JUDGMENT
WA.No.196 of 2o22
Dismissing the WA Without costs.
@,,{?'" 3,offier
..-1_<.-*+,+
G.SudheerKumar
Deveineni Arun Kumar
The State of Telangana
GHMC
SheriLingampallyMunicipalCircle,GHMC
Satish Chandra Sharma
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
