C.Vinay Kumar v. The State of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2025-12-16. C.Vinay Kumar v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[ 3183 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAY. SEN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 38599 OF 2025 Between: C. Vinay Kumar, S/o C. Vinod Kumar, Aged about 25 years' Occ. Business R/o. H. No. 1-8-185/4, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, TS-500020. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Municipal. . Administration and-Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, TS. 2 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporationn, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad, TS. ... RESPONDENTS 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 the nature of Writ of Mandamus delcaring the action of the Repsondent No.
2 in not considering the Petitioners Objectio ns d1. 1211212025 pursuant to the Delimitation Preliminary Notification vide Notification No. 1B42ffPS/HO/ GHMC/2025 dt. Ogl1212025 issued by Respondent No. 2 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and consequently direct the Respondent No. 2 to forthwith consider the Petitioners objections dt. 1211212025 pursuant to the Delimitation preliminary Notification vide Notification No. 1842/TPS/HO/Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation t2O25 dt. Ogl12l2025 issued by Respondent No. 2, before issuing the Delimitation Final Notification. , 8, lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the r;i curnstances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petition, the High Co I t may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 to forthwith consider the t etrtioners Objections dt. 1211212025 pursuant to the Delimitation Prelimin:. y Notification vide Notification No. 1 842/TPSiHO I GHMC|2025 dt. 09l 1212025 r sue(i by Respondent No.
2 before issuing the Delimitation Final Notification pe; ding disposal of the a bove writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition undr:r Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir :umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Corrr may be pleased to suspend the operation of Delimitation Preliminary Notific: ion vide Notification No. 1842lTPS/HO/GHIVC/2025 d1. 0911212025 issued by Res:ondent No. 2, as far as the proposed Adikmet Division-163 AND Bagh Lingamf elly Division-164 are concerned pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI C. H. JAYAKRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No. 'l : GP FOR MCPL ADMN U ? BAN DEV Counsel for Respondent No. 2 : SRI G. MADHUSUDHAN RE I ,Dy, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 38599 OF 2025 DATE:16-12-2025 Between: C. Vinay Kumar ...
Petitioner AND The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and another. ... Respondents ORDER The limited grievance of the petitioner is that his objections daled 12. 12. 2025 filed to the delimitation preliminary notification No. 1842[TPSIHO/GHMC/2025, dated 09. 12. 2025, are not being considered objectively. 2, Heard Mr. C. H. Jayakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for GHlVtC, appearing for respondent No. 2. rnd perused the material available on record 3, Learned counsel for the petitioner submitt rd that detailed objections have bben made by the petitioner to the delimitation preliminary notification stating that the proposed r rerger of Ward No.
164 of Ramnagar into Division 163 of Adil< net will cause significant inconvenience to the general public, su,l I as change of door numbers which is not only time consuming t r )cess, but also cumbersome process; and that there is a 30 feet NA . A and 100 feet pub c road, vvhich separate two major areas, and ttese permanent features form a natural division between the commrt tities and, from time immemorial, have formed a natural boundary I -'tween the two areas. Learned counsel relied on Rule 4 of the Telar gana Municipal Corporations (Delimitation of Wards) Rules, '1996 (f rr short 'Rules, 1996'), which reads as under: "The area of the Corporation shall be divided int, Wards as notified by the Government under Rule 3, dul1, taking into account the natural - boundaries, Geographical r atures and contiguity of the area. Wherever natural boundarie s could not be adopted, survey numbers, T. S. numbers,, important junctions or lanes shall be considered as far as po: sible. " 4.
Learned Standing Counsel for respondent lo. 2 submitted that the objections of the petitioner with reference ic Rule 4 of the :7 I ; Rules, 1996 will be duly considered, and so far, the objections have not been rejected and thus, the writ petition is premature and is liable to be dismissed. 5 However, considering the grievance of the petitioner that his objections are not berng considered and he has reasonable apprehension that the delimitation preliminary notification will be finalized without giving an opportunity of hearing to him, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No. 2 to forthwith consider the objections of the petitioner with reference to Rule 4 of the Rules, 1996, by affording an opportunity of hearing in accordance with law, and pass orders, in accordance with law. No order as to costs' As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed SD/. K.
BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,< / i--t- //TRUE COPY// \J SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Telangana State, Hyderabad, TS. 2. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporationn, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad, TS. 3. One CC to SRI C. H. JAYAKRISHNA, Advocate. [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 5. One CC to SRI G. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC. IOPUCI 6. Two CD Copies BSK HIGH COURT DATED:1611212025 CC TODAY t T . '' x. o 4 $+ n.. \ /H* ORDER WP. No. 38599 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ {,
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.