Writ petition challenging a government order cancelling MCH resolutions and subsequent estate proceedings was dismissed as infructuous after petitioner's counsel submitted that the cause no longer survived for adjudication. No order as to costs.
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.
a c a4 !
[3383 J
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OFTELANGANA : AT{YDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAYOF T\IOVE:VIBER TWO THOUSAND ANDNruENTY FiVT:
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMINARAYAhI/I,I.I I$I{|ETTY
WRIT PETITION :24462 OF 2014
Between:
tVlusheerabad Public Welfare AssociationRepresenteci bV', ,ts President P. Sudhershan S/o. Pentaiah, agedabout 60 years, Business, R,'o. l-{.No.6-4-399, Bholakpur, Hyderabad.
"..PETITIONER
AND
".RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of theConstitution of lnclia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled therewith,the l-'ligh Court maybe pleased to pass an appropriate writ, order or directionparticrrlarly one in the nature of WRIT OFIvIANDAIUUSdeclaring the G.O.Ri l'Jc.'1044 [\4unicipal Administration Department datedOGIOTt2OO5issued by the Gr:ve,rnment ofAndhra Pradesh Municipal Administration& Urban Development Departrnent,Secretariat, Hyderabad, the 1st Respondentherein wherebio cancelingthrl ResclutionNo.116 dated 2gl}5l1gg0 of the StandingCommitteeand the ResolutionNo.B3 dated 25tt03t1991 passed by the GeneralBody,lVlCH, Hyderabad in contravention of the Section 679-A of G.H.M.C.Act.1955,without affordingany oppoltunity to the Writ Petitioner as arbitraty illegal, capricious,violative of principlt,r:; ,rf nantral justice apart from being violative offundamentalrightsguarantee:tJtr:: tlre Writ Petitioner
rl .ii: i ;
, ;t;i1r';11 , , hnirl+.i
, rti ! t{ I
t$s"i"
,,',.,:
.' ,: ,
under Articles 14, 19, 21 and Article 300-4 of the Gonstitution of lndia and consequently set aside the Proceedings No. 605/E0/El/lVlCil-{li?.Oci5l 113 dated 2402-2006 issued by the Additional Commissioner (Estates), [Vluriicipal Corporation, of Hyderabad, Hyderabad, the 2nd Respondent herein in,the interest of justice.
Prayer is arnended as per C.C).dt.1119114 in WPMP 3336:il1,tt
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 30640 OF 2014)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cirr:;uryrstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Hrgh Court i-,'li:r:y Lle pleased to suspend th€r operation of the Proceedings No.605/E0/f'llft,1r.-,t-1./20051113 dated 24-02-2006 issued by the Additional Commissioner (liist;rtes1, tt/unicipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad, the 2nd Respondenl..
c o u n s e I ro r t h e P et i t i o n e r' rt Ti,t# :?.iX.Ei X H A N D Fi, *, r, iR A s A D ^Hfl-f,ft
counselfor the Respondent No.1 : GP FoR McpL ADMN-uRBl\n$ [irrv
counsel for Flespondent No.2&3:SRIG.MADHUSUDHAN REDDy, :!ic FoR GHMc
The Court marde the following: ORDER
!::'i ;
i i.:1 'rljx
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY of 4
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking following relief:
oTo d.ectare ^il1e^lyoceedingsNo.6OS/ E0/ El/ MCH/ 2OOS/I 13 dated 24.O2.2.o06_issueJ by the Ad.d.itionar commissioner Estates Municipal Corporatioi of Hgderab"a- ttgi"robad., the 2nd lease Respondent herein without reference straight to ihe "y1A judrgment cancering aoi.i the-27.06.2014 subsisting pa"ssed in A.5.No.243 of 2010 in tie fite of thi Cni.l Judge Citg Ciuil Court Hyd"erabad., as illegal and arbitrary.,,
2' ' sri santosh Ravi Kumar, learned counser representing Sri sivalenka Ramachandra prasad, Iearned counser for the petitioner on record and sri G. Madhusudan Reddy, rearned Standing counser for respondent Nos.2 and 3 are present.
3' Learned counsel for the petitioner wourd submit that cause in the present writ petition does not survive for adjudication and it has become infructuous.
4' Recording the above submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if &oy, shalt stand closed.
SD,/-Iil|. {,tilMi{N ALI BAIG Iii'ru,f{T I{EGt
//TRUE COPY/ i
To,
ECTION OFFICER . Ad'rr-rcate. IOPUC]
1,0 tv BSK tlll ./
,
,11
q
\
HIGH COURT
DATE D:27 111 12025
ORDER
c
(.) ir \fl ltl26
1 'r
*
t
SF'ATC<br>
WP.No.,24462 of 2014
DISMISI}ING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFFIUCTUOUS WITHOT'T COSTS
4
%
1
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Musheerabad Public Welfare Association, represented by its President P. Sudhershan
The Government of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary (Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department)
The Additional Commissioner (Estates) (East Zone), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad
The Estate Officer, Office of the Estate Officer, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad
Laxmi Narayana Alishetty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
