B. Paul Raj Kumar v. The Commissioner

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM W.P.No.3166 of 2019

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sampath Prabhakar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2.

The petitioner challenges the notice dated 04.02.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent under Sections 452(1) and 461(1) of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. 3.

The petitioner asserts that as against the impugned notice, he has submitted explanation on 13.02.2019 and he apprehends that the respondents may take coercive action without passing final order.

4.

Learned Standing Counsel submits that no action would be taken against the property of the petitioner without passing final order by the respondents.

5.

Recording the aforesaid submission, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the property of the petitioner without considering his explanation before the final order is passed.

6.

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

7.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.

_______________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 18th February, 2019 sj