Disposed

Md. Yousuf v. Government of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Sept 2022WP/16216/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by petitioners challenging the inaction of Respondent No. 3. The Court directed the respondent to consider the pending representation dated 21.02.2022 and pass reasoned orders within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 3 to consider the representation dated 21.02.2022 and pass reasoned orders within eight weeks.

Md. Yousuf Vs Government of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁷ ]

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 16216 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

IV1d. Yousuf, S/o. Mahaboob Ali Aged about 59 years Occ.Business H.No.65, New APHB Colony Gadwal Town and lr,4andal Jogulamba Gadwal District, T,S.

¶9

Shameem Begum, W/o. Md. Yousuf Aged about 54 years H.No.65, New APHB, Colony Gadwal Town and Mandal Jogulamba Gadwal District, T.S.

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

'1 . Government of Telangana, Department of [\4arketing and Co-operation, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Spl. Secretary.

¶13

The Registrar, Dept of Registration and Stamps, Nampally, Hyderabad-

¶14

The District Registrar of Societies, Jogulamba Gadwal District, Telangana State. Jogulamba Gadwal District, T.S.

¶15

The Gadwal Commission Marchants Association, New Gunj,

¶16

Gadwal,Jogulamba Gadwal District, Rep by its President

¶17

...RESpONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus. i) Declaring the inaction of Respondent No.3 in not considering representation d1.2110212022 of the petitioners, wherein sought to set aside item 3 of Resolution dl.14lo2l2o22^passed by^general body of Respondent No.4 association, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust apart from Violative of principles of natural justice, consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to get allotted house plots, out of total land admeasuring Ac.11.03 Sy.No.118 and 119 situated at Venkampet Shivar, Gadwal, Jogulamba-Gadwal District, registeredⁱⁿ favour of the petitioners.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶20

Petition under iection 151 CPC praying that in the circLrmstances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the petition, the High Corirt m:ry be pleased to direct Respondent N( 4 to stay all further proceedings in respe:t of draw of lots and Registration of rtllotted plots to its members, in rescr'ct of total land admeasuring Ac.11.(:] Sy.No.^'1 18 and^'1 19 situated at /enkampet Shivar, Gadwal, Jogulamba-^,';adwal District, till the disposal of the nrair writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI K. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY Counsel for the Resp ondent No.1 : GP FOR COOPERATION Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI ARSHAD AHMED

¶22

The Court made the I :,llowing: ORDER

i I

THE HON'BLE SIII JUSTICL A.AI]HISHEK REDDY

¶27

IA'RIT PETITION No.16216 of 2022

¶28

or{DER:

¶29

This Writ Petition is filed cleclaring the inaction of the respondent No.3 in not consiclcrirrg the representation clated 21,.02.2022 of the petitioners. wherein sought to set aside item 3 of resolution dated 14.02.2022 passcd by general body of respondent No.4 association, as illeagal, consequerrtlv direct the respondent No.3 to get allotted house plots, out of total land admeasuring Ac.11.03 in Sy.No.11B&119 situated at Venkampet Shivar, Gadwal, Jogulamba-Gadwal^{District, registeredin favour of the petitioners.}

¶30

The main grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent No.3 is not considering the representation dated 21.02.2022 ol the petitioners.

¶31

Having regard to the fact that the petitioners had already filed representation dated 21.02.2022 to the respondent No.3, without going into the merits or demerits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.3 to

¶32

¶33

¶34

consider the r eprg5s113tion of the petitioners cia ted ,11 .02.2022 ancl pass rl(iccss. r rv orders, strictly in accordance rv ith law, riS expcrlitiousll as possilrle, preferably, within a peri:ri of eight (08) weeks from lire date of receipt of a copy of this ord:r, duly putting responclent Ir r.4 on notice.

¶35

I)endir r; miscellaneous petitions, if anv, shall sta nd closetl.

¶36

There shall b, r no ordel as to costs.

¶37

SD/.K.VENKAIAH

¶38

ASSIIiI AN T REGISTRAR

To,

,TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

The Spl. Secre^.rry, Government of Telangana, Department of l/arketing and Co-operation,^I iecretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶43

The Registrar, -)ept of Registration and Stamps, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶44

The District Re,ristrar of Societies, Jogulamba Gadwal Dil;trct, Telangana State. Jogularr sa Gadwal District, T.S.

¶45

The President,^(iadwal Commission Marchants Association. New Gunj, Gadwal,Jogula^-1ba Gadwal District.

¶46

One CC to Sri l(. Madhusudhan Reddy Advocate [OPUC]

¶47

Two CCs to G[' for Cooperation, High Court for the State o'l' Telangana at Hyderabad.^',3UTl

¶48

Two CCs to Gl 'for Revenue, High Court for the State of^-lelang;ana at Hyderabad.^iSUTJ

¶49

One CC to Sri \rshad Ahmed, Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

Two CD Copie;

¶51

'10. One Spare Co ry

Sm PS s-/ (/

HIGH COURT

DATED:2310912022

ORDER

WP.No.16216 ot 2022

r t'
c
$'
?<br>o'a.) 20u
r-) [ 5 N0\l
a'..!
/
\ rl.,-'g;;pa1cV -/,9)
--._:=i-

¶58

OISPOSING OF THE V IP WITHOUT COS

¶59

5
<>

Md. Yousuf v. Government of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Yousuf v. Government of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Shweta Agarwal Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Subhash Kedia Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Ambareesh Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary

K.Raja Rao , Jupally Raja Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Kadaveru Saroja and 9 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 6 Others

Smt. Dabbeta Sarojana Vs The State of Telangana