Dismissed

Sandhyarani Mandadapu v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Dec 2023WP/33371/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Telangana permitted the withdrawal of Writ Petition No. 33371 of 2023 seeking revocation of a building permission revocation letter, dismissing the petition with liberty to file a fresh writ. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn without costs.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh petition; petition dismissed as withdrawn.

Sandhyarani Mandadapu Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 33371 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sandhyarani Mandadapu, W/o. Raghu Ramaiah Mandadapu Age. 42 Occ. Employee Rl/o. Eastem Part of Plot No.306, (Type-B) Survey No.60, 71 to 77, Block No.1 , Kondapur (V), Serilingampally (N/), Ranga Reddy District, T S.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principle Secretary Revenue (U.C.l) Department, Secretariat Hyderabad -

¶12

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Tank Bund Hyderabad.

¶13

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,Rep by Deputy Commissioner, Circle No.20, GHMC, Serilingampally Zone, Ranga Reddy District.

¶14

The Asst. City Planner, Serilingampally Zone Ranga Reddy District.

¶15

The Additional Collector Urban Land Ceiling and Competent Authority, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus and declaring the action of the respondents No.2, 3 and 4 in issuing Revocation Letter to the building permission of the petitioner Lr. No.207007/GHMCl1760612022 dated 1610912022 and consider the petitioner application for building permission inspite of orders of this Honourable Court vide W P No.2681012O23 dated. O4l1Ol2O23 as being illegal arbitrary and violative of Nlicle 14,21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the above the Revocation Letter vide Lr. No. 207OO7|GHMC|176OO|2022 dated 16-09-2022 issued by respondents 2, 3 and 4 and reconsider the building permit

¶18

.-a-

¶19

No.259399/21B4lcHMCl2O23 dated 24-02-2023 of the petitioner in respect of Eastern Part of Plot No.306 (Type-8), in Survey No.60, 71 to 77, totat admeasuring 152.58 Sq.mts (Out of 285 Sq.yds) situated at Block No.1, Kondapur (V), Serilingampatly (M), Ranga Reddy District, T S., and bounded by North. 30 Wide Road South. Plot No.307 East. 30 Wide Road West. part of plot No.306-B

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶21

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 respondents 2, 3 and 4 to set aside the Revocation Letter vide Lr. No. 2o7oo7lcHMcl176o6l2o22 dated 16-09-2022 and reconsider the building permit No. 259399/2184lc H Mcl2o23 dated 24-02-2023 bearing Eastern part of ptot No.306, Type-B, in Survey No.60, 71 to 77, total admeasuring 152.59 Sq_mts (Out of 285 Sq.yds) situated at Block No.1, Kondapur (V), Serilingampalty (M), Ranga Reddy District, T S., and bounded by North. 30' Wide Road South. ptot No.307 East. 30 Wide Road West. Part of plot No.3O6-B

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. THAKUR ROOPA SINGH

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

HONOURABLE SRt JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITI ON No.33371 OF 2023

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw

¶29

the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to institute a fresh writ petition, aM to that effect, an endorsement has been made on the case bundle.

¶30

Recording the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel, permission is accorded, and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty as sought for. No order as to costs.

¶31

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending

¶32

in this writ petition stand closed.

¶33

SD/. C. PRAVEEN^KUMAR ASSISTANT^REGIST R

¶34

//TRUE^COPY'/

¶35

SECTION^OFFICER

¶36

to,.,. ,*o ccs to Gp FoR REVENUE ,High court for rhe state of relangana,^at Hvderabad [OUfl 2 lil"" ff;'s-nr.^{tnnrun RooPAsINGH'Advocate IoPUCI} 3 Two CD^CoPies BM GJP

?F^.q

HIGH COURT

DATED:1111212023

ORDER

WP.No.33371 ot 2023

1 t\e STAIG
q v
o
cf
? 7 0E[ ?s8 .L,
-<br>f_'
, ,/
lr.r:pt,TCl_/

¶43

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

¶44

fAc

Sandhyarani Mandadapu v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandhyarani Mandadapu v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Amarender Reddy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its District Collector

Mirza Wajid Ali Baig Vs The State of Telangana

Shakir Jahan Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Mekala Bixapathi , Buchaiah Vs Mrs.Pamela Satpathi

Sri Pabba Ravinder Vs The State of Telangana

Palusa Anjaiah Vs The State of Telangana