HUDA Saroornagar Commercial Complex v. The State of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-12-05. HUDA Saroornagar Commercial Complex v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case...
Judgment text
[ 3418 I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO WRlT APPEAL NO: 1360 OF 2024 writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Lefters Patent Prefened against the order dated. 16-07-2024, Passed in w. P. No. 18594 ot 2024 on the file of the High court. Between: HUDA Saroornagar Commercial Complex, Lessees Association, "Saroornaqar -Shops R. R' HUDA (HMDA) Commeicial Complex, Saroomagar, Srinivasa Samia, District. ilep. by its Generai-Secretary by O. Arjun, S/o. O. Aged about. 59 yrs, Occ. Stamp Vendor .. ,APPELLANT AND 1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, MuniciPal Secretariat and Urban Development Defa(ment, at Administration Hyderabad. (GHMC), 2. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. 5, Saroornagar, R'R' District' 3. The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC Circle - 4.
The Assistance City Planner, Saroomagar, Circle - 5, GHMC' LB' Nagar Zone, Hyderabad. 5. The Commissioner, Hyderabad Metro Development Authority' Swarna Jayanthi Complex, Ameejrpet, Hyderabad-500038, Telangana ... RESPONDENTS IA NO:2OF 2O24 '151 praying that in the circumstances stated Petition under section cPC in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased Io t f. :: 7 Commercial not to demolish the HUDA Saroornagar ,/ direct the Respondents the writ appeal Complex, R. R. District and pending disposal of SRI OGIRALA RAMESH Counsel for the Appellant: REDDY' No'1: SRI E'VENKATA Counsel for the Resporrdent URBAN DEV OP TON MCPL ADMN RAo PAcHwA' t" o' tE Resporrdent No'2 Counsel for the r"S$l'f*tf FOR V'SIDDHARTHA GOUD' REP' Resporrdent No'5: SRI Counsel for the HMDA GOUD, SC FOR SNiV. IIENNSTMHA thr: following: JUDGMENT The Court delivered THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARA. DHE AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO WRIT APPEAL No.
136O of2O24 JUDGMENT: Per the Hon'bte the ChieJ Justice AIok Atudhe) Mr. Ogirala Ramesh, learned counsel for the appellant appeared through video conferencing. Mr. E. Venkata Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, for the respondent No. 1. Mr. Srinivasa Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation for the respondents No. 2 to 4. Mr. V. Siddhartha Goud, learned counsel representing Mr. V. Narasimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel for the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, appears for the respondent No. 5 through video conferencing. 2. This intra court appeal is frled against the order dated 16. 07. 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the writ petition preferred by the appellant, namely W. P. No. 1859 4 of 2024, has been disposed of. 3.
Facts rise to fiIing 5;iving of this appeal briefly stated are that the appellant is HUDA Saroornagar Commercial Complex, Shcps Lessees Association (hereinafter referred to as, "the appellant association"). The members of the appellant association were allotted shops by the erstwhiie Hyderal-. ad tlrban Development Authorit5r (HUDA) (now Hyderabad M=tropolitan Development Authority (HMDA)) in Saroornagar Commercial Complex. The Assistant City Planner, Saroornagar Circle No. 5, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, issued notices under Section 456 of the Greater Flyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, on 23. 05. 202. 1 to the members of ttre appellant association by which the members of the appellant association were asked to vacal. e the shops. 4. The merrbers of the appellant association filed reply to the aforesaid notices issued to them and thereafter the appellant association also submitted a common reply on 29. O5. 2O24. !
'he appellalt association thereupon filed the ) ,t I lr a writ petition in which the validity of the notices dated 23. 05. 2024 was assailed. 5. The learned Single Judge, by the order dated 16. 07. 2024, has disposed of the writ petition preferred by the appellant with the liberty to the authorities to take further action in terms of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, during the pendency of A. S. No. 2086 of 2018. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that A. S. No. 2O86 of 2018 is pending before this Court and therefore, the respondents cannot take an action for eviction of the members of the appellant association. 7. We have considered the submissions made by the I I I learned counsel for the appellant association. l 8. The members of the appellant association are defaulters inasmuch as they have not tendered the rent due and payable in respect of the shops to the HMDA.
The Department of Civil Engineering, Osmania Universit5r, vide {I) proceedings dated 26. 03. 2014, apprised the HMDA that the building is in dilapidated condition and is unfit to be occupied. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the 1e arned Single Judge has rightly permitted the authorities I. o proceed ahead in accordance with law i. e. , the provisi,)ns of the Public premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. The order passed by the learned iiingle Judge does not suffer from any infrrmit5r warranting interference of this Court in this intra court appeal. 9 . In ttre result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. 'I'here shall be no order as to costs. Miscellimeous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed sD/- T. KRtSttNA KUMAR DEPUTY\REGELrRAR //TRUE COPY// )--.. SEETI-ON OFFICER To, 1. One CC to SRI OGIRALA RAMESH, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI SRINIVASA RAO PACHWA, SC FOR GHMC [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI V.
NARASIMHA GOUD, SC FOR HMDA [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana at tlyderabad [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies BSR BSR + ) HIGH COURT DATED: 0511? -12024 '_ sit\ ^;; ;' . \ q :) t' ',! c ? ifi ) 13 t:-'i ir i) Di .. /. JUDGMENT WA. No. 1360 of 2024 DISMISSING THE WRIT APPEAL, WITHOUT COSTS )Dti-i
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.