Disposed

Ashoda Shantamma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Jan 2024WP/293/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the proposed grant of building permission to respondents 4 and 5, alleging non-consideration of her objections. The court, with consent, disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, directing the 3rd respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondent No.3 to consider the petitioner's representation filed on 29.12.2023 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within four weeks.

Ashoda Shantamma Vs The State of Telangana — Municipal and Town Planning | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 293 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Ashoda Shantamma, W/o. Late^{Nandaiah,aged about 65 years, Occ.} Housewife, Rl/o.Mallapur Village,^{DharmaramMandal, Peddapalli District.}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by^{its Principal Secretary Departmentof} Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Secretariat^Buildings, Dr.B.R.Ambecikar Telangana State^{Secretariat, Hyderabad.}

¶13

The District Collector^{(Panchayat), Peddapalli District at Peddapalli-}

¶14

The Mallapur Gram Panchayat, Rep.by^{its PanchayatSecretary, Mallapur} Villaqe, Dharmaram Mandal, Peddapalli^District.

¶15

Ganiam Mallaiah, S/o.Raiaiah, aged^{+8 years, Occ. cultivation, R/o 2-} 73l'1 ,Mallapur Village, Dharmaram^{Mandal, Peddapalli District.}

¶16

Gandam Saroja, W-/o. Gandam^{Mallaiah,aged 41 years, Occ.Housewife,} N o.2-7 3l l,Mallapur Village,^{Dharmaram Mandal,Peddapalli District.}

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 ot the^{Constitution of lndiapraying that in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiledtherewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or^{Direction more particularly in the} nature of writ of MANDAMUS^{declaring the actionof the respondents 2 and 3} more particularly the action^{of the 3rd respondent in proposingto grant build'ing} permission for the land in an extent of Ac.0.08^{guntas situatedin Sy.No.2B8l1-2lG} bounded by south. others,^{west. R and B Road, East.shedbelongsto Gandam} Mallaiah and North. Land^{belongs to Gandam Mallaiah, as illegal, arbitrary, without} jurisdiction and violative of principles of^{naturaljustice and consequently direct the} 3rd respondent not^{to grant buildingpermission in favourof respondents4 and 5} pertaining to the above stated^{land, without consideringthe objectionsfiled by the} petitioner on 29 -1 2-2023.

¶19

IANO:l^OF2024

¶20

petition under section 151^{cpc prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition' the High Court may be pleased to direct} the respondent^{No'3to consider the petitioners representation daled 29'12-2023} in accordance^{with law, pendingdisposal of the above writ petition in this Hon'ble} Court.

¶21

Counsel^{for the Petitioner: SRI VADLAKONDIIIVIKUMAR REDDY} ;;;;;;iior^{the Respo'i:';i';":-;i'E'-ro*PANcHAYAT RAJ RURAL} counsel^{for the Respondent No'3: sRl PxisHoRERAO' sc FOR GRAM} PANCHAYATH

¶22

Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos'4 & 5: --}

¶23

The Court^{made the following: ORDER}

I \

THE HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICE K.SARATH} WRIT PETITION N0.293^{0F 2024}

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This writ^petition is^{frled under Article 226 of}

¶31

Constitution^of India^{seekingthe following reliet}

¶32

'...to issue a writ in^{the natureof Writ of Mandamus} declaring the^{action of t}le respondent Nos'2 and 3more} particularly ttre action^{of the respondent No'3 in proposing to grant} building^{permissionfor the Iand in an extent of Ac'O'O8 guntas} situated in Sy.No.288/1-2/G^{boundedby South: Others,west: R} arrd B Road, East:^{Shed belongsto Gandam Mallaiah and North:} Land belongs to^{Gandam Malaiah, as illegal,arbitrary,without} jurisdiction and violative of^{principlesof naturaljusticeand} consequently direct the^{respondentNo'3 not to grant building} permission in favour of^{respondent Nos'4 and 5 pertainingto the} above stated land,^{without c'onsideringthe objections Iiledby the} petitioner ot 29.12.2023^{and to pass..'"}

¶33

2 Heard Learned^{Counselfor the petitioner, learned} Government^{Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondent} Nos.l and 2, Sri^{P.KishoreRao, Iearned' Standing} Counsel for the^{resPondentNo.3. With the consent of} both sides, this writ^{petition is disposedof at the stage of} admission itself.

¶34

L,earned Government^{Pleader for the respondent} No.3 submits that^{the respondent No'3 will considerthe}

¶35

¶36

representation filed by the petitioner on 29.L2.2O23 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶37

In view of the submissions made by the both sides, wittrout going into the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3 to consider ttre representation filed by ttre petitioner on 29.12.2023 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. No order as to costs.

¶38

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand

¶39

closed.

¶40

//TRUE COPYII

¶41

SD/. K. VENKAIAH AssrsrANrysrRAR

¶42

SECTION OFFICER

¶43

¶44

1 The Principal Secretary Department of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Secretariat Buildings, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Telangana State Qecretariat,^{Hyderabad, State of Telangana.}

¶45

2 The District Collector (Panchayat), Peddapalli District at Peddapalli.

¶46

3 lfe farp-hayat^{Se_cretary,MallapurVillage, Dharmaram Mandal, Peddapalli} District, Mallapur Gram Panchayat.

¶47

4 One CC to SRI VADLAKONDA RAVI KUMAR REDDY, Advocate TOPUCI 5 Two CCs td GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV, High Court for the State_of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OU!

¶48

1. one CC to SRI P.KISHORE RAO, SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYATH [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies

¶49

PSK. GJP g

HIGH COURT

DATED:1210112024

ORDER

WP.No.293 of 2024

HE SIAT €
+
co 0 1 FEB 202{ tr) ti,I
,4,
* *
DE3P,^i A,,'Ll'-

¶56

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUT COSTS.
@)d
2*
I

Ashoda Shantamma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashoda Shantamma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Anjaneyulu Vs The State of Telangana

N. Muni Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

kanthula Komuraiah Vs The Government of Ap

Ramapuram Gram Panchayat, Vs The State of Telangana

Rathod Sharadha Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Sri Boddam Bikshapathi, Vs The Government of A.P.