The High Court held that petitioners lacked cause of action to seek immediate writ relief. The Court observed that if the representation is not considered, petitioners can question the adverse order later, and thus disposed of the petition without passing orders.
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)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 20469 OF 2022
Between:
...PETTTtONER(S)
AND
...RESPONDENTS
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 pass order or orders direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent No. 6 to consider the representation dated 3010312022 given by the petitioners and consequently direct the respondent No. 1 to I not to grant permission for construction /development to respondent No. I to 15 in respect of the land Ac.0.30 guntas in survey No. 1400 and 1402, al Cherial Village and fvlandal, Siddipet District, Telangana and consequently direct the respondent No.8 to cancel the permission dated 2910712018 which is granted on fabricated documents submitted by the respondent No. 13 to 15 and pass.
|.A.NO:1 OF 2022
Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 9 to 15 not to do any construction in the subject properties and pass.
Coudsel for the Petitioners : SRI.D.RAGHAVULU
Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : GP FOR REVENUE
Counsel for the Respondent No.S : SRI.N-PRAVEEN KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : G.P FOR MUNCIPALITIES
Counsel for the Respondent No.7 : G.P FOR IRRIGATION
Counsel for the Respondent No.8 : G.P FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEV
Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.9 to 15 : NONE APPEARED
The Court made the following ORDER
I
t t
IION'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KA.NNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION No.2O469 of 2|)22
ORDER:
This writ petition is liled seeking direction to the resp rndent No.6 to consider the representation dated 3O.O3.2O22 given by the petitioners ar-rd consequently dire<:t the respondent Nos. 1 to 8 not to g.:ant permission for constmction/development to respondent Nos.9 to 15 ln rospect of the land adrneasuring Ac.O-3O guntas 1n surv3y No. 14OO and l4O2 at Cherial Village and Mandal, Siddipet District, and direct the respc,ndent No.S to cancel the perrnission dated 29.O7.2O1A which is granted on frrbricated documents submitted by the respondent Nos. 13 to 15.
3 If the representation dated 30 .C3.2022 of the petitilners is not considered by the respondents and any adverse orders are passed, it is always open t-o the petitioners to qu 3stion the said order. I At this point of time, this Court is not inclinecl to pass ant'orders.
W.P.No.20469 of 2022
2
/
as to costs.
6 Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
//TRUE coPY/t
SD/-T.KRISHNA KUMAR ASSISTANTiREGISTRAR
Ci,-
SECTION OFFICER
To
tl. The Joint Director,Director of Town and countryPlanning, oflice- at 3rd to 5tn rioti oao, opp. PrlBuildins, AC Guards, tly9q"9{,rS- 500004'
7 The Chief Enbineer, lrrigationDepartment, Siddipet District'
S.A SWK
I I I I i I I I I I I I
HIGH COURT
DATED::2810412022
ORDER
a
!1,; $I $Ie
2 E JUI- 2m €l
(i
t
ttr'..iC,ts
WP.No.2iO469 of 2022
DISPOSING OF THE W.P
SRI N.PRAV=EN KUIVARWITHOUTCOSTS,
@
g\n
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners have a cause of action to seek immediate directions under Article 226 regarding construction permissions.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
V. Balaiah and others
State of Telangana
V. Durgaiah
LALITHA KANNEGANTI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
