Sri Ippatapu Ramesh Chandra Babu, v. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.M.P. NO.51269 OF 2015 IN/AND WRIT PETITION NO.34455 OF 2014 DATED:28-12-2015 Between:

Sri Ippatapu Ramesh Chandra Babu and others ... Petitioners And Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority Rep. by its Metropolitan Commissioner, Block-a, HMDA Complex, Tarnaka Hyderabad and others ... Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: Mr. Manu COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1: Mr. Y. Rama Rao COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2: Mr. G. Narender Reddy COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.3: A.G.P. for Municipal Administration COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.4: Mr. M. Chalapathi Rao

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER:

The writ petition is filed for the following relief: "...to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order declaring the permission No.12983/P4/Plg./HMDA/2008, dt.17.07.2009/1106-2009, granted by respondent No.1 and Occupancy Certificate bearing Letter No.106/2014, dt.18.10.2014, issued by respondent No.2, are illegal, null and void, in the interest of justice."

W.P.M.P. No.51269 of 2015 is filed for impleading the applicants as petitioner Nos.4 to 20 in the writ petition. The Deputy Director, Mediation and Arbitration Centre of this Court has addressed a letter in Roc. No.2511/HCLSC/2015, dt.15.12.2015, to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court wherein it is mentioned that the dispute is referred to mediation as per order dt.08.10.2015 of this Court and the same was settled through mediation and a Memorandum of Compromise is also entered between the petitioners and respondent No.4. Along with the said letter, he has enclosed a report and a Joint Memorandum of Compromise signed by the petitioners, respondent No.4 and the proposed petitioners. Mr. Manu, learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as the proposed petitioners, and Mr. M. Chalapathi Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.4, also agreed that the matter has been settled through mediation under a Joint Memorandum of Compromise filed by the petitioners, respondent No.4 as well as the proposed petitioners.

At the hearing, the proposed petitioners are also personally present and submitted that they have signed the Joint Memorandum of Compromise. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 has also not opposed the impleadment of the proposed petitioners.

W.P.M.P. No.51269 of 2015 is allowed with a direction to the Registry to carry out appropriate corrections in the cause title of the writ petition.

In the light of the above facts, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of Joint Memorandum of Compromise, dt.4.12.2015. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, interim order dt.17.11.2014 passed in W.P.M.P. No.43094 of 2014 shall stand vacated and W.P.M.P. No.43094 of 2014, W.V.M.P. No.251 of 2015 and W.P.M.P. No.9756 of 2015 shall stand disposed of as infructuous. _______________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28-12-2015 bnr