D.Satyanarayana Rao v. The State Of Telangana And 3 Others

Date : 9.2.2021 Between:

D Satyanarayana Rao S/o Late Gopalaiah aged 62 years Occ Business R/o Plot No 134 Sidhartha Nagar S R Nagar Hyderabad Telangana500 055 Petitioner And The State of Telangana and 3 Others Rep by its Secretary Dept of Revenue Secretariat Hyderabad Respondents The Court made the following:

ORAL ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

2.

Petitioner claims to be owner of plot no.19 admeasuring 300 sq yards in Survey No. 66/2, Rayadurgpanmaktha, Serilingampally mandal. Petitioner asserts that he has constructed a house in the said house plot, which is forming part of un-approved lay out. Taking advantage of the scheme formulated and notified by the Government vide G O Ms No.59 dated 30.12.2014, petitioner claimed to have applied for regularization. Alleging that the said application is not disposed of so far and regularization is not granted to him in spite of making several representations, this writ petition is filed. 3.

When the matter is taken up, learned Assistant Government Pleader produced photo copy of the computer generated information with reference to the status of consideration of the application submitted under G.O.Ms No. 59 dated 30.12.2014. Against column No.8 in the said statement, it is shown that the Committee has not recommended for granting regularization holding that 'no functional building found' . The committee meeting was held on 2.11.2015. While Assistant Government Pleader asserts that said proceedings are placed on the web site and copy was also communicated to the petitioner, learned counsel for petitioner asserts that the copy was not given to petitioner.

4.

Without entering into this aspect and having regard to the fact that request of the petitioner was already rejected, the cause in the writ petition does not survive. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out remedies as available to him under law including the remedy of appeal, if any available against the decision of the Committee rejecting the request of the petitioner for regularization of unauthorized construction made by him. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, are closed. __________________ P NAVEEN RAO,J DATE: 9-2-2021 TVK

Date : 9.2.2021