High Court order closing an infructuous writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by petitioners challenging the respondent corporation's action of issuing a notice for demolition.
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 FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FIFTHDAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE T.VINODKUMAR
WRIT PETITIO NNO:20694 0F 2011
Betwee n:
...PETITIONERS
AND
Greater HyderabadMunicipal Corporation,rep'by its, Commissioner' Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad
...RESPONDENT
Petition underArticle 226 of lhe constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High courtmay be pleased to issue a writ ororderor direction, more preferably in the nature of writ of Mandamusdeclaringthe action of the Respondentcorporationin issuingnotice No'06/ACP/TPS/V/SZIGHMCl2O11,Daled13-07.2ol1underSec.636ofHMCAct asillegal,arbitraryandwithoutfollowingdueprocessoflawandconsequently direct the respondentherein not to demolishthe structures standing in the petition scheduleproperty bearing No.21-2-583 to 589 admeasuring 330 Sq Yards situated at Urudu Sharif,Patel Market, Hyderabad,in the interest of Justice'
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 25132OF 2011</sup>
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying thatin the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, theHigh Court may be pleased to direct the respondent notto demolish the structures standingin the petitionschedule prope(y bearing No.21-2-583 to 589 admeasuring 330 Sq.Yards situated at Urudu Sharif, Patel Market,Hyderabadin thelight of the "status quo"ordersdated24-11' 20'10 in 1.A.No.1059/'10in O.S.No.3991/10 issued by theIV Junior Civil Judge,City Civil Court, Hyderabad,pending disposal of the writpetition, in the interestof justice.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SHARAD SANGHI Counsel for the Respondent:SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR VEERJALA,SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER
TII[, HON'I}LESRI JUS'I'ICET' VINOD KUMAR
/
WRIT PIiTITIONN o.20694 of 20l l
ORDEII:
Learnedcounsel for petitioners submits that the cause in the
Writ Petitiondoes not survivefor considerationof the Courtany
further.
2 Recordingsame, this Writ Petitionis closedas infructuous' No costs. 3 As a sequel,rniscellaneouspetitions pending if any shall
stand closed.
SD/. K.SREERAMAMURTHY ASSISTANTREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// "r SECTIONOFFICER
To I . One CC to SRI SHARAD.sANGHl Advocate tOtU"l"u," [O'UC] 2 ffi;; i"Siii FnnveEN KUMARVEERJALA' Adv' 3. Two CDCoPies PSK. GJP
s
!,I
HIGH COURT
DATED:0510812024
ORDER
WP.No.20694 of2011
t ll E S rA <br>() e
r.
t 14 !eT ?ur
,,,,
I I
.tias 5 ^'t tl o
cLoslNGTHE WRIT PETlTloly
WITHOUT COSTS.
.}
Roop Karan Sanghi
Rajendra Prasad Sanghi
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation
T. Vinodkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
