Gadipally Mallareddy v. The State of Telangana and 6 others
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-21. Gadipally Mallareddy v. The State of Telangana and 6 others. Read the judgment and case details...
Judgment text
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) IVONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION NO: 22689 OF 2020 Between: Gadipally l\,4allareddy, S/o Ramchandra Reddy, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H. No. 8-2415112, Nangunur Village and [\,4andal, Siddipet District. ... PETITIONER ANO 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary. Panchayath Raj Department. Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Siddipet, Siddipet District. 3. The District Panchayathraj Officer, Siddipet, Siddipet District. 4. The Secretary, Nangunooi Gram Panchayath, Nangunoor, Siddipet District 5. Gadipally Upender Reddy, S/o Late Kista Reddy, Aged about 55 Y99IS. ^ --. Occ. Govt. Teacher, Fl/o Flat in First Floor, Sarojini Complex, Near MRO Office, Siddipet Town and Mandal, Siddipet District. 6.
Shapurapu Srilatha, D/o Mallareddy, Aged about major, R/o Nangunoor Village and [r,4andal, Siddipet District. 7. Challa Parshireddy, S/o Siddimallareddy, Aged about lr/ajor, Fl/o Nangunoor Village and Mandal, Siddipet District. ... RES'ONDENTS 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of [r,4andamus declaring the action on the part of the respondents No. 3 and 4 in issuing house construclion permission for the land bearing H. No,B-35 of Nangunoor Village and l\,4andal, Siddipet District, eventhough there is civil dispute pending in O. S. No 120 of 2O2O on the file of the Principal Junior civil Judge, At Siddipet without considering.
the representation, dated 07 t0712020 as arbitrary, illegal, abdication of the statutory duty cast on them and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner und'er Articles 14, 19 and 2'1 of the constitution of lndia and consequently cancel the permission, daled 2110812020 granted by the respondent No. 4 in favour of respondents No. 6 and 7. 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 suspend the permission, dated 2110812020 granted by the respondent No. 4 in favour of the respondents No. 6 and 7, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SANJEEV GILLELA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: SRI G. NARENDER REDDY, SC FOR GRAMPANCHAYAT Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 to 7:------ Thc Court made thc follo$ ing: ORDER .
IHE HON'BLE SRI Jt]STIC[, CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT I'ETIl'lON No. 22689 of 2020 0ltDt,tR: Ileard learned counsel 1or pctitioner Sri G. Narender Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 4, submits that taking into consideration the material filed by respondent No. 5, permission \ lbr construction on the subject land has been granted to him. I-{e tirrther sr-rbrnits that cxcepl subrnitting a re presen t:rt ion, the pelitioncr neither produced rnatcrial documcnts nor obtained in junction ordcr fiom the Cor-rrt. I{e also sLrbmits that i1' the petitioner is ilggrievccl r,r ith such pcm'rission, the re is an e l'lcctive altcnrative remecly o1' appcal provided to him under the 'l elangana Pauchayal Raj Act. 20l8 (1br short'the Act'), to the District Collector. in those circLlmstances, there being an appeal remedy available to the petitioner with respect to the permission granted to respondent No.
5 for making construction on the subject land, AS rightll contended b1' the lean. red Standing Counsel. and considering the f'act that the pe titioner has tlled only an inj unctiun sLrit, this Writ Petition is closed uranting liberty to the petitiouer to arail the ru'ncdy' ol'appcai in tcrms ol'Scction l2l o1'the Act \ w P. No 22689 of 2020 It is rnade clear that the observations, if any, made by this Courl in this order shall not be constrr-red as expressing its opinion rvith respect to the title over the propertv or u,ith regard to tlie right of the petitioner for seeking iniunction in his pcnding suit, w,hich is rcquirecl to be considered on its ora,n rnerits. Miscellaneous applications, il- any pending, shall stand closed. Thcre shall be no order as to costs. SD/- N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //rRUE coPY/l Go sEcr; oFFrcER To, 1 . One CC to Sri. Sanjeev Gillela, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri G. Narender Reddy, SC for Grampanchayat, Advocate IOPUCI 3.
One CC to Sri Praveen, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies SM h^/ HIGH COURT DATED:211'1212020 S 7i. -e o 7! ( ^ I o I o 2 5 z J,4t{ 2021 o !. * SP:TCt ORDER WP. No. 22689 ol 2020 I CLOSING THE WP I WITHOUT COSTS I I S$J i"A 1uP ,- \ )r a{u' \-,
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.