Disposed

Varala Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Jan 2023WP/435/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana considered a writ petition under Article 226 and S. 151 CPC alleging illegal inaction by the Karimnagar Municipal Corporation regarding park land protection. The Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation and reply within three months before disposing of the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.12.2022 and reply within three months; petition disposed of without costs.

Varala Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

[321e ]

¶3

MONDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 435 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Varala Srinivas, S/o.Veeraiah, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Business; Rlo.H.No.10-2-468/1, Kottayaswada, Vidyanagar, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. ...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat buildings at BRKR Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶11

The Karimnagar Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar town, Rep. by its commissioner'

¶12

...RESP.NDENTS

¶13

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 rssue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAIT/US declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the representations dated 1411212O22 submitted by the petitioner requesting the respondents to protect the park land of the Layout of admeasuring Ac 9.00gts in Sy.No.1234 of Kothayasawada of Ramnagar Grampanchayat, Karimnagar District- from the land grabbers as the same is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to consider the representations dated 1411212022 submitted by the petitioner

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶15

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 2nd respondent to consider the representations dated 1411212022

¶16

submitted by the petitioner requesting the respondents to protect the park land of Layout of admeasuring Ac 9.00gts in Sy.No.1234 of Kothalasawada of Ramnagar Grampanchayat, Karimnagar District from the land grabbers, pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAVINDER REDDY SINGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents No.1:GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel forthe Respondents No.2: SRl. K. PRABHAKAR RAO, SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P,MADHAVI DEVI

¶20

WRIT PETITION No.435 of 2023

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

¶23

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2"d respondent in not considering the representation dated 14.12.2022, submitted by the petitioner, requesting the respondents to protect the park land of the Layout of 1n admeasuring Ac.9.00 gts Sy.No.1234 of Kothayasawada of Ramnagar Grampanchayat, Karimnagar District from the land grabbers as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the 2"a respondent to consider the representations.

¶24

I I

¶25

Learned Standing counsel for Municipal Corporation appeared and submitted that they are taking steps to protect the park area.

¶26

Since, the main grievance of the petitioner is that the representation is not considered by the respondents, this Court deems it fit and proper to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and give a reply to the^petitioner

¶27

PMD,J W,P.No.435 of 2023

¶28

within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order.

¶29

Accordingly, the Writ^petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

Miscellaneous applicatior-rs, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

¶31

\ \

¶32

SD/. K.SREERAMA MURTY ASSISTANA REGISTRAR i,TRUE COPY// ( .r; SECNON OFFICER

¶33

To,

¶34

The Commissioner, Karimnagar Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar town. 2. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 3. One CC to SRl. RAVINDER REDDY SINGI REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRl. K. PRABHAKAR RAO,SC FOR MUNICIPAL coRPoRAroN [oPUC] 5. Two CD copies

BM SW

HIGH COURT

DATED:0910112023

ORDER

WP.No.435 of 2023

i.,.'ii. 5-,!i;
I <t C<
+,(
r'I
s tI JAilzou] c:itl

¶42

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶43

@r-414 ffi6-

Varala Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varala Srinivas v. The State 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

Nalla Vijendar Vs The State of Telangana and 8 others

M/ s. Mega Creations Vs The State of Telangana

Shak Nayeem Pasha Vs Smt. Vakati Karuna, I.A.S.

Amukunta Krishna Reddy Vs the State of Telangana

Mohsin Bin Ibrahim Masqati Vs The State of Telangana

Nagula Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana