Dismissed

Jogi Babu v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Telangana HC21 Sept 2022WP/13117/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner prayed to cancel building permissions granted to other parties by the Gram Panchayat. The High Court held that since permission was already granted, the remedy is an appeal under the relevant Panchayat Act, not a writ. The petition was disposed without granting the relief.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to issue writ of Mandamus declaring action illegal and directing cancellation of building permission was dismissed; petitioner directed to file appeal under Section 121 of Telangana Gram Pancha

Jogi Babu Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

I I

¶2

HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original^{Jurisdiction)}

¶3

WEDNESDAY,^{THE TWENTY FIRSTDAYOF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY TWO}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICEA.ABHISHEKREDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETITI^{ON NO:131 17 0F 2022}

¶7

Between:

¶8

JooiBabu,S/o.Kistaiah,Aged44years,occ.PvtEmployee,Fl/o.H.No.2-41' B a ih e e ra^{b a"dM a nd-a l, Vi k a ra ba d Di st ri ct'}

¶9

E"x".., r^v-if l,^g ",

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of^{Telangana, Rep.by.its Principal Secretary' PanchayatRa'i} Department ,^{Secretariat,Hyderabao'}

¶13

2 The District Panchayat^{Raj Officer, Vikarabad District} Ekmai Grampanchayat,^{Rep by its Grampanchayat SecretaryEkmaiVillage'} Basheerabad Mandal,^{Vikarabad District}

¶14

4 Gandeti Shantamma,^{W/o Pentaiah Aged60 y99F gqc Household'Fi/o} Eirliriiirrir,'eaine'erauaa^{Mandal Vikarabad District'}

¶15

5 Gandeti Balrai, S/o^{Pentaiah Aged 40 yeqrs Occ Private Employee Rl/o Ekmai} village, Basheerabad^{Mandal Vikarabad llrstrrct'}

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under^{Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith'theHighCouitmaybe pleased to issue any^{writ order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of} WritofMandamusdeclaringtheactionoftherespondentNo.3innotconsidering theapplication/representationofthepetitionersubmitteddl30-12.2021asillegal, arbitrary and^{unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent No 3 to} cancelthebuildingpermissiongrantedtotheunofficialrespondentsNo.4and5in respect of house^{No. 2-41(old2-45) admeasuring120 sq yds situatedat Ekmai} village, Basheerabad^{t\rlandal'Vikarabad District'}

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶19

Petition under Section 151 cPC^{praying that in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High courtmay be pleasedto direct} the respondent No.3 to cancel^{the building permission granted to the unofficial} respondents No. 4 and 5 in respect^{of house No- 2-41(old 2-45} )^{admeasuring'120} sq.yds situated at Ekmai^{village, Basheerabad Mandal, Vikarabad District pending} disposal of the writ^petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI^{ANJANAYULU YADANABOYINA}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.^{1 & 2: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ} RURAL DEV

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent^{No. 3: SRI M. RAJGOPAL,} SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos. 4 & 5: SRI MOHD. ISLAM UDDIN ANSARI}

¶24

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶25

) )

¶26

I t

¶27

TIIE HON'I}LE SRI JUS'I'ICE A. ABIIISIIEK RI'DDY WRIT PI]]'ITION No. I 3ll7 of 2022 ORDI]R:

¶28

Questioning^the action of the respondent No.3^_ Ekmai Gram Panchayat, rep. by its Gram panchayat Secretary, Ekmai Village, Basheerabad Mandal, Vikarabad District, in not considering the application/representation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2021 to cancel the building permission granted to the unofficial respondents in respect of the subject property situated at Ekmai Village, Basheerabad Mandal, Vikarabad District, the petitioner has filed the present Writ petition.

¶29

A counter is filed by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 stating that the respondent Nos.4 and 5 have been granted building permission by the Grarn panchayai concemed vide permit dated 12.01.2022. That if the petitioner is aggrieved with the permission granted to the respondent Nos.4 and 5, the petitioner has to file an appeal against the same.

¶30

The learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, has stated that once the Gram panchayat grants any building

¶31

,{AR, J W.P.No lll l7 ot2022

¶32

¶33

I j

¶34

permission. the only rcn.redy available to the^petitiotlel' is to file an apl)eal undcr Section 121 of the Telangana^Gram Panchayat Act, 20 I u.

¶35

Having regard to the above, the^prayer sought by^the petitioner to consider his representation dated 30.12.2021 cannot be granted. However, the^{petitioner is} at liberly^{to file} arl appropriate application/appeal befbre the^competent authority questioning the grant of building^{pemrission granted} in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5. lf any such applicationlappeal IS rnade by the petitioner, the authority concerned shall put all the interested parties on rtotice, give an oppoftunity of personal hearing, consider their objections, if any, and pass necessaly orders strictly in accordance with law.

¶36

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶37

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shalI stand

¶38

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶39

To,

¶40

SD/-I.NAGA LAKSHMI DEPUTY REG]STRAR ,TRUE COPY' (i) SECTION OFFICER

¶41

The Principal Secretarv. panchayat Raj Department , State of Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶42

The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Vikarabad District

¶43

The Grampanchavat Secretary, Ekmai Grampanchayat. Ekmai Village, Basheerabaci N,la;dal. vitaratiio oiitri

¶44

One CC to SRI ANJANAYULU yADANABOytNA Advocate tOpUCl 5. One CC to SRI M. RAJ GOPAL, SC FOR GRAIM PANCHAYAT [OPUC]

¶45

One CC to SRI MOHD. TSLAM UDDIN ANSART IOPUCI

¶46

Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT,RAJ RURAL DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶47

B. Two CD Copies.

¶48

One spare copy.

¶49

NPJ

¶50

¶51

t{\d

$ 0

fr )

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 10912022

ORDER

WP.No.13117 of 2022

I
r.*. (,
<br>J ;i
(€ s!
II
\ r; \
'. .1
:
.!c.ix +

¶59

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶60

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶61

Jogi Babu v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jogi Babu v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gajjela Krishna Murty Vs The State of Telangana

Auth Sign.,M/S. Sushee Hitech-Prasad-Ncc Mytas Jv, Hyderabad Vs Cheif Secy, State of Telangana, Hyderabad and 5 Others

Smt. Bagireddygari Sunitha Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Mr.Mohammed Aseem Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Nemali Rajini Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

M/s Sri Shyam Additives Vs The State of Telangana