Oral order dispensing with costs as a speaking order in appeal was already passed, leaving no question for adjudication in the writ petition. Liberty granted to parties to pursue other contentions after appeal disposal.
Writ petition disposed of without costs; liberty granted to respondent to pursue appeal and petitioner to raise contentions later.
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.
\
[3168 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTHDAYOF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND ANDTWENTYFOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICEK.LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION NO:20739 0F 2024
Between:
G. Sangram,S/o. Late Mondaiah, Age 45 Years'Occ- Business'R/o H No' 6-2-15411,Power House C;i;;y, "Godavarikhani' Ramagundam Mandal' Peddapalli District. ...'ET,T.ONER
...'ET,T.ONER
AND
J 9ry9ffiqn6ffiffiffififi#;;Peooapatti District ...RESPoNDENTS
...RESPoNDENTS
Petitionunder Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the circumstancesstated in the af{idavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleasedto issuean order or directionmorepartlcularly one in the nature of writ of mandamusor any other upp'op'i't"writ declaringlhe actionof the respondentNo 2 innot takingany actionagainstthe iliegal con.structionof walls in the layout formedin Sy No 12513";;"to plot No 117 of the petitioner' situated at Malkapurshivar' Raman;;;rnMandal' t^"^'::::"'District'considerins the complaintsfiled by "Oitn'""t' dated15-02-2023 and 08-01-2024' is nothing butarbitrary, illegal' null ;;;;"''and atjo violative of principlesof natural iustice andalso violativeof the provisions of the Telangana MunicipalitiesAct'2019and of theConstitutionof lndiaConsequentlvdirect alsoviolative of Articles ';;;;;t againstthe illegally constructed walls by the therespondent No 2 to O" "Oton t respondentNo s uro"rrnJl;"-;;;""""" IntT :lr::l"t:'::t.T"":;::l::': ;rta*\o Q\o\ No 111 ol \he Pe({roner
'|.
Ramagundamlvlandal, Peddapalli District, consideringthe complaintsfiled by the petitioner dated 15-02-2023 and 08-01-2024.
IA NO :1 OF2024
Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled in support of thepetrtion, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 to take action against the illegally constructed walls by the respondent No. 3 blocking the free access in the layout formed in sy. No. 12513, adjacent to plot No 117 of the petitioner situated at tvlarkapur shivar, Ramagundam Mandar,peddapaili District, considering the compraints fired by the petitioner daled 15-02-2023 and OB-01_2024.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.VENUMADHAV counsel for the Respondent No.1: Gp FoR McpL ADMN & uRBAN DEV Counset for the Respondent No.2: SRI I(ADARU pneAHAXAn inb, Si fOn counset for the Respondent No.3: snrHrfrulrrrseTTy AKHTL FoR M/s. JURISLIT LAW, LLP
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRIJUSTICEIC LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITIONNo.20739 0F 2024
ORALORDER:
Mr. K. Venumadhav,leamed counselfor the petitioner'Mr' Kadaru PrabhakarRao, Iearned Standing Counselfor respondentNo'2 and Mr. EnnamsettyAkhil,leamedcounselrepresentingIt#s'Juristit Law, LLP appearingon behalfof respondent No'3, on instructions' would submit thatrespondentNo.2 has alreadyconsideredthe representations dated15.02.2023 and 08.01'2024and passedspeaking order dated 03.09.2024.Feeling aggrieved by the said speakingorder' respondent No.3has already preferred an appealbefore the Regional Director - cum-AppellateCommissionerofMunicipal Administration,Warangal,who in tum fixed the hearingon 15.'t0.2024. Inthe lightof the same, nothingremainsin the present writ petition to adjudicatefurther.
I I I
,,.'qfii
2
disposal of the said appeal. In the circumstances of the case, there
shall be no order as to costs.
As a scquel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any. pending in
this writ pctition shall stand closed.
I
sD/-T. TTRUMALA EEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// N
To
SECTIONWFICER
PSK.
BS
s
i I , I I I ; I
HIGH COURT
DATED:1411012024
ORDER
WP.No.20739of 2024
at
( /-) 'Q .'' t!14
'tl-
DISPOSINGOF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS.
u{''u
gra
G. Sangram
Public Grievance Officer, Ramagundam Municipal Corporation
Securities (or similar entity), Ramagundam Municipal Trust
Mr. Srikanth
K. Lakshman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
