Mrs. Rukhsana Begum v. The State of Telangana and 2 Others
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: A.ABHISHEK REDDY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-16. Mrs. Rukhsana Begum v. The State of Telangana and 2 Others. Read the judgment and case details...
Judgment text
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original J urisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 22938 OF 2O2O Between: Mrs. Rukhsana Begum, W/o. Anwer Sultan, Aged 49 years, Occ. Household, R/o. H. No. 22-1-875lB, Sultanpura, Noorkhan Bazar, Hyderabrd, ,u,13%1,1flb*. * AND 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, [t/unicipal Administration Department, Hyderabad, Telangana. 2. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Deputy Commissioner, Circle-6, Charminar Zone, Hyderabad, Telangana. 3. Assistant City Planner, Greater Hyderabad l\,4unicipal Corporation, Circle-6, Charminar Zone, Hyderabad, Telangana. . ,. RES'.
NDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent issuing the orders under sec 452(2) of HIVC Act 1 955 dated 1 6/1 1/2020 without following lhe procedure under the Act and without giving notice under sec 452(1) o'f HIVC Act 1955 to the petitioner premises i. e 22-1-BBO to 888 situated at Sultanpura, Noorkhan Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana is illegal, arbitrary, u nco nstitutiona l, contrary to law and against the principals of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere/demolish the petitioners premises i.
e 22-1-8BG to 888 situated at Sultanpura, Noorkhan Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana, without following due process of law lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere/demolish the petitioners premises i. e 22-1-BB6 to 888 situated at Sultanpura, Noorkhan Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana, pending disposal of the Writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R. A. CHARY Counsel for Respondent No. 1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3: SRI PASHAM KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER - THE HON'BLE SRI ]USTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 22938 of 2O20 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.
1, and Sri Pasham Krlshna Reddy, learned Standlng Counsel for GHMC, appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission ltself. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent No. 3 in issuing the impugned order dated 16. 11. 2020 directing the petitioner to remove/demolish the unauthorised con struction s. Learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, states that when the officials of the respondent Corporation visited the spot, the petitioner was unable to produce the building permission, and therefore, the impugned order was passed, Learned Standing Counsel further states that in view of the fact that the petitioner is having a valid building permission, if any deviations are found, the official respondents will take necessary action, after following the due procedure as contemplated under the law. In view of the above submissions, the impugned order dated 16. 11,. 2020 is set aside.
However, it is made clear that the petitloner shall make constructions strictly in accordance with the rules, and if any deviations are found by the offlcial respondents, they are entitled to take necessary action as per law. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. N I I SD/-N. CHANDRA SEKHAR o ASSISTANT RE RA R //TRUE COPY// SECTI N OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, lVunicipal Administration Department, State of Telangana, Hyderabad, Telangana. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad [/unicipal fhe Corporation, Circle-6, Charminar Zone, Hyderabad, Telangaha. 3. The Assistant City Planner, Greater Hyderabad IVunicipal Corporation, Circle-6, Charminar Zone, Hyderabad. Telangana. 4. One CC to Sri R A Chary Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GPJor Municipal Administration & Urban Development, High Court for the State of Telangana (OUT) 6.
One CC to Sri Pasham Krishna Reddy, Standing Counset for GHMC (OPUC) Two CD Copies r\(7,*l HIGH COURT DATED: 1611212020 1 HE S rA 14: ( J c o 1g t)EC 2,fl0 * ,/ ORDER WP. No. 22938 of 2020 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS $! , r 1-l'ut )ttl,1try',-
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.