High Court directed Municipal authorities to follow due process of law, including issuing a notice, before initiating action against demolishing a compound wall.
Directive to respondent authority to follow due process of law before initiating action against the compound wall.
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.
[3166 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 20193 OF 2011
Between:
Smt. Sridevi,W/o Keerthi SayannaEmployeeH.No. 5-5-79 (old), 5-5-129 (New), Gandhinagar locality, Nirmal Town,
...PETITIONER
AND
The Commissioner,Nirmal Municipality, Nirmal, Adilabad District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition underArticle 226 of the Constitutionof lndiapraying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maybe pleased to issuea Writ, Orderor Direction, more particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaringthe action of the respondentin trying to demolishthe compoundwall of thepetitioners house bearingno. 5-5-79 (Old), 5-5-129(New), situatedat Gandhinagarlocality, Nirmal, Adilabad District at the instigationof localpolitical leads eventhough it was constructedby the petitioneras per the permission and approvedplangrantedby the respondent, without even issuing any noticeto the petitioner,without affording anyopportunity tothe petitioner and without followingany procedure conternplated under law as illegal, arbitrary,unjust. abuseof process of law, violationof principles of naturaljustice and against the provisions ofA.P. Municipalities Act and consequently direct the respondent not to interferein the peacefulpossession and enjoyment of the petitioner with regardto the house propertyand its compound wall bearing H.No.5-5-79(Old), 5-5-129(New),Gandhinagarlocality, Nirmaltown, Adilabad Districtin the interestof justice
l.A. NO:1OF 2011(W PMP. NO: 24481 OF 20111
Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent not to interfere in the peacefur possession and enjoyment of the petitioner with regard to house property and compound wal bearing H.No. 5-5-79 (old), 5-5-129 (New), Gandhinagar rocality, Nirmar town, Adirabad District In the interest of justice pending disposal of the above writ petilion
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. S SURENDER REDDY
Counsel forthe Respondents: SRI B. JAGAN MADHAV RAO (sc FoR MC,TELANGANA)
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE T. YINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.20193 of2011
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of respondent in trying to demolish the compound wall of petitioner,s house bearing No.5-5-79 (old), 5-5-129 (New) situated at Ghandhi Nagar Locality, Nirmal, Adilabad District without issuing any notice and without affording any opportunity and without following due process of law, at the instigation of local political leaders as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, abuse of process of law, violation of principles of natural justice and against the provisions of the Telangana Municipalities Act.
Rao, leamed Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, and perused the record.
z
1
her house as illegal and that the procedure being resorted to by the
respondent authority is unknown to law.
4..Leamed Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent, on the other hand, submits that the authorities would follow due process of law in the event the authorities intend to take any action against the construction of compound wall made by the petitioner, firstly by causing verification of their record, thereafter by issuing show cause notice to the petitioner, affording sufficient time to the petitioner to offer explanation and thereafter by passing order thereon duly considering the explanation
submitted by the petitioner.
is taken on record.
process of law before initiating any action against ttre compound wall constructed by the petitioner to her house.
costs.
3
8 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand
closed.
SD/. N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
([
//TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
To,
BM 1- KKS
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 310312024
ORDER
WP.No.20193of 2011
1 HE SIA 16
k
k4.
oo-) 22 APB 2024 oz
"<br>* D€s parcHcO *
DISPOSINGOF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
%'u
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Municipal authorities were following due process of law while threatening to demolish a compound wall despite apparent permissions granted earlier.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Sridevi
The Commissioner, Nirmal Municipality
T. Vinod Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
