Disposed

Smt. Parveen Sultana v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Apr 2024WP/7317/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition challenging the rejection of building permission for a compound wall by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 121 of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 within two weeks and directed authorities to decide the appeal within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file appeal under Section 121 of Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 within two weeks.

Smt. Parveen Sultana Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

Between:

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:7377 0F 2024

¶8

Smt. Parveen .Sultana, W/o. Late Sri .Mohammed Osman Ali, Aged about. 75 Years, occ. Housewife. nro o_s_2a7, S;;;;;;r-i;E;y:brinasar Cotony, Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad.

¶9

AND

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

1 The State of Telanqana. Reo hv.principal Secretary, panchayat ei rvr ru, o ( Raj and Rural

¶12

1. p-ey{9ome1t I ne uram I,anchaval. Himavathnagar, Department, Secri:tariat, ttyOL;;G;.''' Ri.,p. by panchayath Secretary, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Re'ddv Distritr

¶13

J. The District Collector.- Ranga Reddy District, Lakadikapool, Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Atticle 2-26 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fileO tnerewiitr, itr" ,, ig;- Corrt may be pleased lo issue the direction or directions, more particuiirly i-n the nature of writ of Mandamus dectaring the tetter dt.O5 03 2O2i ir.ruO ty it" znd respondent as illegal, arbirrary and not according to taw, anO^{-lonleirentry} direct the 2nd Respondent to grant the permission for the conslruction of a compound wall surrounding the premises admeasuring Ac. 0.22 gts in Sy.trto.SS, situateO li Himayathnagar Vi age of Moinabad tr,taniat, Rangi RJJay Oi.tri"t.

¶16

IAN o:1 OF 2024

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, [nu"High corrir"y be preased to direct the 2nd respondent to grant the permission for tnE construction of a compound wall surrounding the premises admeasuring Ac. 0.22 gti ih 'distri"t.Sy.No.SS, situated at Himayathnagar Viflage of Moinabad Maniat, nang" Re'Jdy

¶18

Counsel for the^petitioner: SRI SHARAD SANGHT Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Gp FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI p. KTSHORE RAO,

¶20

SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

t I

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶24

WRIT PEirTTION No.73t7 0F 20/24

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of

¶27

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶28

"...to issue the dtrectton or directions more partianlarlg in tLe nature of Wrif of Mand.amus d_eclaring the letter dated 05.03.2024 issued bg the respondent No.2 os iltegal, arbitrary and not acarding to law, and. consequentlg direct the respondent No.2 to grant ttre permi.ssion for the anstruction of a ampound. taall suroundtng the premises admeasuring Ac.O.22 guntas in Sg.No.9S, situated. at Himayathnagor Vitktge of Motnabad Mandal, Ranga Reddg Distnct and. pass..."

¶29

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government pleader for panchayat Raj and Rural Development and Sri p.Kishore Rao, learned

¶30

Standing Counsel for Gram panchayat appearing for the respondents arrd perused t.l.e entire material on record. With the consent of both sides, this writ petition is disposed of at t.l.e stage of admission itself.

¶31

¶32

¶33

SK,J W.P.No.7317 of 2024

¶34

In view of the submissions^{made by bothsides,} without going into merits of the^{case, the writ petition is} disposed of by granting liberty^{to the petitionerto file an} appeal against the impugned^{letter dated O5.O3-2O24} issued by the respondent^{No.2 under Section L2L of} Telangana Panchayat Raj^{Act, 2018 within two (2) weeks} from the date of receipt^{of copy of ttre order.After hling} of the said appeal, the concerned^{authoritiesare directed} to dispose of the same^{within three (3) months from} thereafter. There shall^{be no order as to costs'}

¶35

Miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{pending shall stand}

¶36

closed.

¶37

SD/.A.V.S.PRASAI)

¶38

ASSISTANT REG

¶39

//TRUE COPY// SECTIO OFFICER

¶40

To, 1 The Principal Secretary, Panchayat^{Raj and RuralDevelopment Department,} State of T6langana, Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶41

2 The Panchayaih Secretary,^{GramPanchayat, Himayathnagar, Moinabad} Mandal. Ranoa Reddv District.

¶42

3 The Dislrict iollector,-Ranga^{Reddy District,Lakadikapool, Hyderabad-} 4 One CC to Sri. Sharad^{Sanghi,Advocate} [OPUCI 5 Two CCs to GP for Panchayat^{Raj and RuralDevelopment, High Courtfor the} State of Telangana al^Hyderabad. IOUTI

¶43

6 One CC to SriP.^{Kishore Rao, SC for Grlrmpanchayat} [OPUC]

¶44

'7 Two CD Copies

Su CJP 4

HIGH COURT

DATED:O310412024

ORDER

WP.No.7317 ol 2024

1\i r_ J I i\ i,:
.<br><br>:,: .l
fi AY Zii2rl .- rt
[3 :'!i
j,;, -'. ,it
, e ,.i
i] . :/'
:- ' -:tra'r ' i'

¶51

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT^PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶52

9\5

Smt. Parveen Sultana v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Parveen Sultana 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Jadhav Gopal Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Mr.Diviti Raj Das Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Rajender Kumar Jain Vs The Special Deputy collector (La), Unit-I,Orr

Lingala Ramya Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Sri. Potla Laxmaiah , Laxman Vs The State of Telangana

Mudavath Ramesh Naik Vs The State of Telangana