Bro. Andrews v. The State Of Telangana And 4 Others

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY W.P.NO.27164 OF 2019

O R D E R

Aggrieved by the action of respondents 2 to 4 in trying to interfere/demolish the subject property of the petitioner without following the due process of law, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Chatla Madhu, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 to 4, submits that as on today, the Corporation has not taken any action and that the writ petition is premature, and that if the respondents intend to take any action, they will follow the due process of law.

Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for the 1st respondent.

Recording the above submission of the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 to 4, writ petition is disposed of. It is made clear that if the petitioner intends to make any construction, it is open to him to do so, after obtaining necessary permission from the competent authority.

Interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

----------------------------------------- A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J DATE:09-12-2019 avs