Dismissed

T. Mohan Reddy, Nizamabad v. District Town and Country Planning Officer, Nizamabad and 4 Othe

Telangana HC8 Jan 2024WP/1182/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought mandamus against authorities for inaction over alleged illegal construction of shopping complex and function hall on Survey No. 398 without conversion proceedings under the A.P. Land Conversion Act and contrary to layout rules. After respondent No.3 imposed penalty orders and revision obtained interim stay, the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

None granted; writ petition dismissed as infructuous, no order as to costs.

T. Mohan Reddy, Nizamabad Vs District Town and… — Municipal and Town Planning | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETIT]ON NO: 1182 OF 2014

¶7

Between:

¶8

T. Mohan Reddy, S/o. Raja Reddy, Age 46 years,Occ Business, R/o. H.No.6-2-64, Laxminarasimha Residency, Behind Police Guest House, Nizamabad Proper and District, Nizamabad..

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The District Town and Country Planning Officer, Nizamabad District, Nizamabad. I

¶12

The Grampanchayath, Bheemgal, Represented by its Panchayath Secretary, Bheemgal Proper and Mandal, Nizamabad District.

¶13

¶14

The District Panctlayath Officer, Nizamabad District, Nizamabad.

¶15

The Govemment of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary to the Panchayath Raj Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶16

Syed lsmail Zabihullah, S/o. Late Sri Aziz Ullah, Age 44 years,Occ Private service/Business, Ryo. Bheemgal village and Mandal, Nizambad District.

¶17

.....RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondents no. 2 and 3 in not taking any action against the illegal construction of shopping complex and functional hall constructed by the respondent no. 5 in the land in an extent of about 2 Acres in survey no. 398 situated at Bheemgal Village of Nizamabad District by occupying 20 feet wide road and also occupying public road and even though the same is made without obtaining the proceedings

¶19

under Andhra pradesh Agricurturar Land (conversion for Non-Agricurturar Purposes) Act' 2006 and contrary to the provisions of Andhra pradesh Grampanchayath Land Deveropment (Layout and Buirding) Rures, 2002, basin-g on the notice issued by the respondent no. 2 dated 2g_06-2012 and representation submifted by the petitioner dated 07-12-2013 as arbitrary, iregar, null and void and arso viorative of Articres ,r4, 19 and 21 of the constitution of lndia.

¶20

I.A.N 1 2014 MP.NO: 387 oF 2014

¶21

Petition Under sdction 151 Cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in sl.rpport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents ho. z ano 3 to take necessary action against the iregar construction made by tle respondent no.S in the rand in an extent of about 2 Acres in survey no. 3gg situated at Bheemgar Virage and Mandar of Nizambad District, basing on the notice, dated 2g_06_2012 and considering the representation, dated 07 _1 2_201 3.

¶22

Counsel for the petitioner : SRI K.VENUMADHAV

¶23

counser for the Respondentfrlo.l : G.p FoR MUNrcrpAL ADMTNT'TRATTON AND URBAN DEVELbPMENT

¶24

ffiETB,JBI*e Respondenr No.2 : sRt P.RAGHAVENDER REDDY, sc FoR rc_

¶25

DEVCounse I for the Resporldent Nos.3 & 4 : Gp FOR PANCHA YAT RAJ & RURAL

¶26

Counsel for the Res*Jdent No.5 : SRt N.NAVEEN KUMAR

¶27

The Court made the foliowing ORDER

¶28

¶29

I (

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶31

WRIT PETITION No.1182 of 2Ol4

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliel

¶34

"...to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declanng the action of the respondents No. 2 and 3 in not taking any action against the illegal construction of shopping complex and function hall constructed by the respondent No. 5 in the land in an extent of about 2 Acres in Survey No. 398 situated at Bheemgal Village of Nizamabad District by occupying 2O feet wide road and also occupying public road and even though the same is made without obtaining the proceedings under Andhra Pradesh Agricultura-l Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006 and contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Grampanchayath Land Development (Layout and Buitding) Rules, 2002, basing on the notice issued by the respondent No.2 dated 2a-O6-2O12 and representation submitted by the petitioner dated, 07 .12.2013 as arbitrary, illegat, null and void and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the ConsLitution of India and to pass..."

¶35

Heard both sides.

¶36

After filing of the present writ petition, respondent No.3 passed orders in letter No-85/86/2014-[Pts]-1, dated O5.O2.2O14 directing the respondent No.s to pay 50o/o penalty over and above the conversion fee in the form at Annexure-D glving him time of thirty (3O) days to remit to Government account through a challan as specified at sub-rule[ii] of rule-6.

¶37

¶38

In pursuance to the orders of the respondent No.3 dated 05.02.2014, respondent No.5 hled revision before the Government of Andhra Pradesh and obtained interim stay uide Merno No.42 1 0/ Pts.IY / A2 / 20 14- t, dated 24.O2.2O I 4 until further orders.

¶39

In view of the same, the cause in the writ petition does not survive and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶40