Disposed

Vislavath Sathyavathi v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Mar 2024WP/5687/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Writ Petition No. 5687 of 2024, the Telangana High Court disposed of a petition filed by Vislavath Sathyavathi challenging the non-consideration of her representation. The Court directed respondents to consider the representation and pass orders within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.02.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within twelve weeks.

Vislavath Sathyavathi Vs State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 5687 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Vislavath Sathyavathi, W/o Govardhan, aged about 44 yearc, Resident of H.No.2-40, Pothubanda Thanda, Sarlaravulapally village, Kandukuru Mandal, R.R. District.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at Hyderabad.

¶13

The District Panchayath Officer, Rangareddy district.

¶14

The M.P.D.O, Kandukuru Mandal, R.R. District.

¶15

The Gram Panchayath, Pochammagadda Thanda, Sarlaravulapally village, Kandukuru mandal, R.R. District, rep. by Panchayath Secretary.

¶16

Nenavath Ravi, S/o Hariya, aged about 40 years,

¶17

Nenavath Sakri, Wo Hariya, aged about 60 years,

¶18

Nenavath Hariya, S/o Ramu, aged about 65 years,

¶19

Nenavath Laxmi, W/o Ravi, aged about 35 years,

¶20

lO.Nenavath Vamshi, S/o Ravi, aged about 2O years,

¶21

1 1 . Nenavath Vasantha, D/o Ravi, aged about 18 years,

¶22

Respondents 7 to 12 No Pochammagadda Thanda, Sarlaravulapally Village Kandukur Mandal, R. R.District.

¶23

.....RESPONDENTS

¶24

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 appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in

¶25

the nature of^{Writ of Mandamus, declaringthe actionof the respondent} No.4 in not considering^{petitioner representation dated02-02-2024} as illegal, arbitrary and in violation^{of principles of naturaljustice and alsodirect} the respondent no.4 to consider^{petitionerrepresentation and take action against} the illegal construction^{by the respondents 7 to 12}

¶26

l.A.NO:1 F 2024

¶27

petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,the High Court may} be^pleased to direct the^{official Respondentsnot to allow that the respondents} 7 to 12 from making any^{further construction over the subject lands till the disposal} of the writ petition.

¶28

Counsel for^{the Petitioner: SRIG.RAMA CHANDER RAO}

¶29

Counsel for^{the RESPONdENTNOS.1tO3:GP FORPANCHAYAT RAJ ANORURAL} DEV

¶30

Counsel for^{the RespondentNos.4& 5 : SRI P.KISHORE RAO,} SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT

¶31

Counsel for^{the RespondentNos.6to 11 :} --

¶32

The Court^{made the following ORDER}

I I

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PE'TITION No.5687 OF 2or24

¶37

ORDER:

¶38

This writ petition is hled under Article 226 of

¶39

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶40

"...fo issue an appropriate urit, order or direction, more particularly one in tle nature of Writ of Mandamuq declaing th.e action of the respondent No.4 in not consideing the representation of the petitioner dated O2.O2.2O24 as illegal, arbitrary and in uiolation of pinciples of natural justice and also direct the respondent No.4 to consider the representation of the petitioner and take actton again-st the illegal construction bg the respondent Nos.7 to 12 and pass..."

¶41

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri P.Kishore Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat appearing for the respondent Nos.4 and 5. With the consent of botJ. sides, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

¶42

¶43

SK,J W.P.No.5687 of 2024

¶44

(- a

¶45

Learned counsels for the respondents^{submit that} the respondents will consider^{the representationfiled by} the petitioner dated^{O2.O2.2O24and pass appropriate} orders in^{accordancewith law.}

¶46

In view of the submissions made^{by the both sides,} without going into the^{meritsof the case, the presentwrit} petition is disposed of directing the^{respondents to consider} the representation frled^{by the petitioner dated O2.O2.2O24} and pass appropriate orders^{in accordancewittr law within} twelve^{(12) weeksfrom the date of receipt of a copy of this} order. There shall^be no^{orderas to costs.}

¶47

Miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{pendingshall stand}

closed.

SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD

//TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR s'

¶52

SECTION OFFICER

¶53

To 1. The Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj Department, Secretariat, State of

¶54

\ Telangana at Hyderabad.

¶55

The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at Hyderabad.

¶56

The District Panchayath Officer, Rangareddy District.

¶57

The M.P.D.O, Kandukuru mandal, R.R. District.

¶58

The Panchayath Secretary, Gram Panchayath, Pochammagadda Thanda, Sarlaravtrlapally village, Kandukuru Mandal, R.R. District.

¶59

Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶60

One CC to Sri G.Rama Chander Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Sri P.Kishore Rao, SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT (OPUC) 9. Two CD Copies

SA GJP $

!:l', t-b

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410 3t2024

1 trt, S li1 7 ri
4.
11 ltlAl 2[24 L)
DF,S,ATr: tr.

ORDER

WP.No.5687 of 2OZ4

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

WTHOUT COSTS.

Vislavath Sathyavathi v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vislavath Sathyavathi v. 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

Baddela Buddaiah Vs Sri Naveen Mittal, IAS

Dandem Durgaiah Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Smt. Cheemakurthi Naga Raja Kumari Vs The State of Telangana

Pasula Chennamma Vs The State of Telangana

Devthadf Gnaneshwar Vs The District Collector

Namburi Sheshu Vs The State of Telangana