Partly allowed

Mohd. Maqbool Ahmed v. Smt. Shahjahan Begum

Telangana HC3 Jan 2025WA/1453/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Appeal under Letters Patent clause 15 set aside an impugned order as it was passed without notice to certain parties. The Single Judge is directed to rehear the matter after giving notice to the absent parties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 14.11.2024 is set aside. Appellants to appear before the Single Judge on 22.01.2025 to rehear the matter. Writ Appeal disposed of without costs.

Mohd. Maqbool Ahmed Vs Smt. Shahjahan Begum — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[³⁴³⁰ I

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

¶3

FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY^{OF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYFIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{SUJOY PAUL} AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE^{G.RADHA RANI}

¶6

WRITA PPEAL NO: 1453 OF 2024

¶7

writ Appeal under clause 15 of the^{Letters Patent preferred against the order} daled.14t11t2)24ⁱⁿ W.P No.^{31634 ot 2024 on the file of the High Cou('}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mohd. Maqbool Ahmed, Sio^{Mohd. Khalid Ahmed' aged about50 years, Occ'} Business, 20-4-21gl^{1 1317, Khilwath, Hyderabad}

¶10

Mohd. Nasir Ahmed, S/o^{Mohd. Khalid Ahmed' aged about 43 years, Occ'} Business, N o 20^{-4-209I 1 l3l7, Khilwath,Hyderabad}

¶11

Mohd. Basheer Ahmed,^{S/o Mohd. Khalid Ahmed'aged about 45 years, Occ'} Business, N o 20-4-2091¹ l3l7,^{Khilwath,Hyderabad}

¶12

Mohd. Fayyaz, S/o Mohd.^{Khalid Ahmed aged about 35 years,Occ' Business,} Rl o 20-4-209 1316/A, Khilwath,^Hyderabad

¶13

Mohd. Ali Ahmed, S/o^{Mohd. Khalid Ahmed, aged about 33 years, Occ'} Business, N o 2O-4-2091¹ l3l7,^{Khilwath, Hyderabad}

¶14

...APPELLANTS/RES.No.1^{5 to 1 9}

¶15

AND

¶16

Smt. Shahjahan Begum, Wo^{Mohd. Meraj, aged abolt S2.years., Occ'} Household, Rlio 22-5:918i19,^{Rathkhana Galli, Charminar East, Hyderabad'}

¶17

...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶18

The State of Telangana,^{Representedby its Principal Secretary,Municipal} Administration and Urban Development^{Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.}

¶19

Greater Hyderabad Municipal^{Corporation,Tank Bund Road' Hyderabad,} Represented bY its Commissioner.

¶20

Zonal Commissioner, GHMC,^{SardarMahal,Charminar, Hyderabad'}

¶21

Deputy Commissioner,^{GHMC, CircleNo.9,Charminar, Hyderabad'}

¶22

Assistant City Planner,^{GHMC, Circle No.9, Charminar, Hyderabad'}

¶23

State of Telangana, Rep.^{by its Principal Secretary,Home(Police)} Depaft ment, Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶24

B. Director General of police, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶25

Commissi,rner of police, Hyderabad City, Hyderabad

¶26

l0.Station Hc,use Officer, Charminar police Station, Hyderabad.

¶27

'l l Depa(mertt of Heritaoe .Telangana, Government of Telangana, Gunfoundry, Abids, Hyderabad, R;p.'by it; dir""tbi-'-"""" " "

¶28

or I n d i a H vd e ra ba d, c i rc re,

¶29

"^P : ts31i[1g ff" l,!'3 ;?fl '$kf,l"J:gl?%,t'#fl.

¶30

¶31

'13. Conservation Assistant Archeology Survey of lndia, Charminar Sub Circle, Charminar Hyderabad

¶32

'14. District Collector, Hyderabad District, Nampally, Hyderabad

¶33

1 5.Tahsildar, I3ahadurpura Mandal, Hyderabad.

¶34

...RESpONDENTS/Res.No.1 to 13

¶35

1A NO: 3 OF 2024

¶36

Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in tne circumstances stated in the affidavit fired ir support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the operatic,n of the orders passed by the Hon,bre singre Judge of this Hon'bre court in v'/'p.No.3'r634 0f2024 dared 14-11-2024 during the pendency of the Writ appeal.

¶37

Counsel for the Appeltant: SRI R.A.AGHUTHANANO

¶38

counsel for the Respondent No.'r: sRr MOHAMMED HABEEBUDDTN

¶39

counset for the Respondent No.2: Gp FoR McpL ADMN & URBAN DEV

¶40

counsel forthe Respondent No.3 to 6: SRI BALU DUDEKULA, REp. FoR SRI R.VENKATESH, SC FOR GHMC

¶41

Counsel forthe Respondent No.7 to 10: Gp FOR HOME

¶42

counsel forthe Respondent No.11 to 13: sRr GADi PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERIAL lrr IruON

¶43

Counsel for the Respondent No.14 & 15: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶44

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶45

E.- I
n/
'/

¶46

TIIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

¶47

AND

¶48

THE HON'BLE DT. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

¶49

WRIT APPEAL No. 1453 of 2024

¶50

JUDGMENT (per Hon'ble SP,J)

¶51

¶52

Sri R.A. Achuthanand, learned counsel for the appellants; Sri Mohammed Habeebuddin, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Sri Balu Dudekula, learned counsel representing Sri R. Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC, for respondent Nos.3 to 6. I I

¶53

With the consent finally heard.

¶54

Learned counsel for the parties, during the cor.rrse of hearing, fairly admitted that the impugned order^passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.No.31634 of 2024 dated 14.11.2024 is passed without putting on notice the^present appellants/respondent Nos.15 to 19 of the writ petition. Thus, it is agreed that the irnpugned order may be set aside by requesting the learned Single Judge to rehear the matter and after hearing appellants/respondent Nos. 15 to 19^pass a fresh order.

¶55

In view of consensus arrived at, the impugned order dated 14.1I.2024 is set aside. The appellants shall appear before the learned Single Judge on 22.01.2025 in the writ petition. The

¶56

¶57

¶58

Registry shall list the aforesaid writ petition on the said date. No notice separately will be required to be issued to the appellants for the said hearing.

¶59

Accordinglv, the Writ Appeal is disposed of without

¶60

expresslng any opinion on the merits of the case. No c:osts.

¶61

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand

¶62

closed

¶63

SD/.K. SHYLESHI DEPUTY(REgISTRAR //TRUE coPY// seE/rdu oFFtcER

¶64

,.\ 1. The Princlpal Secretary,^{Municipal Adminiskationand Urban Development} Departmer-rt, Secretariat, Hyderabad,^{State of Telangana,.}

¶65

Th6 Comrnissioner, Great'er^{Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund} Road. Hycerabad.

¶66

The Zon'al Commissioner, GHMC,^{Sardar Mahal, Charminar,Hyderabad.}

¶67

The Depuly Commissioner,^GHMQ, Qlrcle^{No.9, Charminar, Hyderabad'}

¶68

S. The Asiistlnt City^{Planner, GHMC, Circle No.9,Charminar,Hyigr?pag.}

¶69

The Princ^pal Se'cretary, Home(Police)^{Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad,} State of Telangana.

¶70

The Direclor General of^{Police,Telangana State, Hyderabad.}

¶71

B. The Commissioner of Police,^{Hyderabad City, Hyderabad}

¶72

The Station House Officer,^{Charminar Police Station,Hyderabad}

¶73

10.The Direcl.or, Department of^{Heritage, Telangana, Governmentof Telangana,} Gunfoundry, Abids, HYderabad.

¶74

11.The Superintending^{Archeologist, ArcheologySurvey of lndia, Hyderabad,} Circle, Ker-rd riya Sa-dan, ll Block, Sultan^{Bazar,Hyderabad}

¶75

The Conservition Asdistant,^{Archeology Survey of lndia, Charminar Sub} Circle, Charminar, Hyderabad

¶76

13.The Distrid Collectoi, Hyderabad^{District, Nampally, Hyderabad}

¶77

'14.The Tahsi dar, Bahadurpura Mandal, Hyderabad.

¶78

15.The Sectbn Officer, Poiting^{Section, HighCourtfor the State of Telanganaat} Hvderabari.

¶79

16.The Section Officer, Writ DB Section,^{High CourtfortheState of Telanganaat} Hyderaba,i.

¶80

17.Ohe CC kr SRI R.A.ACHUTHANAND,^Advocate [OPUC]

¶81

1B.One CC to SRI MOHAMMED^{HABEEBUDDIN, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶82

19.One CC to SRI R.VENKATESH, SC^{FOR GHMC} [OPUC]

¶83

20.One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN^{KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERIAL} OF INDIA High Court for the State^{of Telangana} tt^Hy{e1ab-ad [OPUC] ^

¶84

21.rwo CCs to 6P FOR MCPL^{ADMN & URBAN DEV, High Court for the state} of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI

¶85

22.Two CCl to GP'FOR HoME,^{HighCourt for the State of Telangana at} Hyderaba,l [OUT]

¶86

23.Two CCs td GP-FOR REVENUE,^{High Court for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶87

24.fwo CD Copies

6 BSR BS

_---.-.-i''E-

I t

HIGH COURT

DATED: 03,101t2O2S

LtsT oN 22.01.2025

JUDGMENT

WA.No.1453 of 2024

1t-,E SI4
c
0 I iAtl 2025 2".
o
*,t'
<br>i.- 1 .r:: 5,'-: l-r t'

¶98

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL,

¶99

WITHOUT COSTS

¶100

1
v

Mohd. Maqbool Ahmed v. Smt. Shahjahan Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Maqbool Ahmed v. Smt. Shahjahan Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Sugna Metals Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner (St) Stu-I

Mohan Choudary Seancha Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Krishna Kumar Soni Vs The Assistant Commissioner St

Girijesh Kumar Chaudhary Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/s.Siflon Drugs Private Limited Vs Appellate Joint Commissioner(St)

Mr. Suresh Kumar Shetkar Vs The Income Tax Officer - Ward 1