J.C. Pavan Reddy v. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ***** WP.No.30548 of 2012 Between:

J.C.Pavan Reddy and another ... Petitioner/Appellant (s) and The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

... Respondent (s) DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 11.08.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

Yes/No Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reports/Journals Yes/No Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

Yes/No HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.30548 OF 2012 ORDER:

The case of the petitioner is that he submitted applications dated 27.08.2012 and 18.09.2012 before the respondent Corporation under the Right to Information Act, 2005, by paying necessary fee as per the provisions of the Act with a request to furnish the details along with certified copy of permission or

regularization in respect of new construction and also regularization in respect of illegal structures given in favour of 1) Murali Mohan Rao 2) G.Harinath Rao 3) Shahnawaz 4) Fiaz Khan Khalidi, in respect of the land in Survey No.294/1 to 294/12, situated at Guddimalkapur Village, Asif Nagar Mandal, Hyderabad. But, the respondent neither furnished the information sought by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005 nor passed any orders. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed. None appeared for the petitioners.

Heard Sri P.Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

In view of the above facts and circumstances it is for the respondent to consider the application of the petitioners and pass orders as per law. As such, the respondent is directed to take necessary action on the application filed by the petitioner and pass orders in accordance with law.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

_____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 11.08.2015 tk