Full Bench of the High Court of Telangana closed Writ Petition No. 3659 of 2019 without passing any further orders on the respondents, relying on a related judgment passed on the same day.
Motion to close petition cited without costs was granted; no substantive relief on the notice dispute.
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 FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SEVENTHDAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND ANDTWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESMTJUSTICE LALITHAKANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 3659 OF2019
Between:
Brunoi Surendar, S/o.LateNarayana, Aged about44 years' Occ. Business, ni".ti.NJ.o-t-5+lil2,Suryapet Road, Jangaoh, Jangaon District'
...PETITIONER
AND
2 it J MJnlCipat Commissioner,Jangaonlvlunicipality,Jangaon' 3 The District Collector,Jangaon. 4 K.'6;;r;;, 5lok.'S,jJnii5n,Ase aB vears,occ: Business,PJoH'No'2-10- beliri,'clii"iti11iloi,.tingion-N/and'al, Jangaon District, Erstwhilewarangal District, T.S.
(R-3 is impleaded asper CourtOrder, dated 19'062019')
(R-4isimpleadedaSperCourtorder,datedl5'03.202,1in1.A.No.2of2019')
...RESPO-NDENTS
Petition under Article226 oI the constitution of lndia prayingthat in the Circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to issue writ, order ordirection more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus bydeclaring the action of the Respondent No.2videproceedingsof notice No.UC/90/TPBOlAlV'No.2/Cir-E/MCJ/2018,dt'2o022019isillegal' arbitrary and violativeof the principlesof natural justice and consequently direct the Respondentsnot to interfere in the premisesNo. 6-1-34/3/2,situated in Sy.No.81 and 81of SuryapetRoad,Jangaon, JangaonDistrict'
IAN O: 1 OF 2019
Petition under section151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filedin support of the petition, the High court may be pleasedto stay of ail furtherproceedings of noticeNo.UC/9o/TPBO1^/v.No.2/ Cir-l/MCJ/2018, dt.20.02.2019pending disposal of the Writ Petition'
il2il
IAN O: 3 OF 2019
Petition underSection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filedin support of the petition, the High Court maybe pleased to extendtheinterimordersdaled2l-02-2019passedinlA.No.1/2019in WP.No.3659 of 2019untilfurtherorders.
Counsel for thePetitioners:SRl. R.A. CHARY
Counsel for the ResPondentNo.1: GP FOR MUNiCIPALADMINISTRATIONAND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Counsel for the RespondentNo.z: SRI N. PRAVEENKUMAR' SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES
Counsel for theRespondent No.3: GP FORREVENUE
Counsel fortheRespondent No.4: SRI CHIKKUDUPRABHAKAR
The Court madethe following:ORDER
HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE LALITHAI{ANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITIONNO. 3659of 2Ol9
ORDER:
This Writ Petitionis filed to declare the actionof the 2.d respondent inissuing the proceedingsdated 20'O2'2O19as illegal and arbitraryand consequentlyto direct the respondents not to interferewith the premises bearingNo' 6-l-34I 3 12 situated in SurveyNos. 81 and 81 of SuryapetRoad, Jangaon' 2. Heard Sri R.A.Chary, learned counselfor the petitioner and Sri NPravenKumar, learned StandingCounsel for the respondentCorporation'
SD/.B.S.CHiRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' SECTION OFFICER
To, 1. One CC to SriR.A Chary, Advocate [OPUC] i. i;; cc.io-epror vtuni;ipainominidtration'an!^t].1banDevelopment'High - coirtloiflrL State of Telarisana at Hvderabad [oUT]
I
I
45 9n" One 99 CC tot_o Sri N. Praveen Kumar,Sri Chikkuduprabha(ar, SC Advili;iSpucifor Municipalities [OPUC] 6 Two CD Copies 7 One Spare Copy \ CHR BS \v-
\ \
lt I
HIGH COURT
DATED:0710412022
ORDER
W.P.No.3659 of 20'19
1 i\ , q T I €.
q
C)
0 6 JUN ?[2?
oo -L
.*
+ DES
CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
BRUNOI SURENDAR
DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION
MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER
DISTRICT COLLECTOR
KONDA SIVA KUMAR
LALITHAKANNEGANTI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
