Bitla Ramakrishna S/O.Somaiah, v. The State Of Telangana, Represented By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN

Present

WRIT PETITION No.30482 of 2015 Bitla Ramakrishna, S/o. Somaiah, Aged about 40 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Gundampally, Kothaguda Mandal, WRIT PETITION No.30513 of 2015 Muthineni Veeraswamy, S/o. Venkataiah, Aged about 36 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Muthojipet Village, Narsampet Mandal, Warangal District.

WRIT PETITION No.30534 of 2015 Mulugu Kusumakumari, W/o. Narsing Rao, Aged about 45 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. Narsampet Village and Mandal, WRIT PETITION No.30537 of 2015 Nagelli Padma, W/o.Venkata Narayana, Aged about 43 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. Narsampet Village and Mandal, WRIT PETITION No.30547 of 2015

Gottam Kumar, S/o.Venkataiah, Aged about 38 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Ashoknagar Village, Khanapur Mandal, The Court made the following:

WRIT PETITION Nos.30482, 30513, 30534, 30537 & 30547 of 2015 COMMON ORDER:

Heard Sri A. Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for the 1st respondent and Sri N. Praveen Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent and with the consent of all the learned counsel, the writ petitions are disposed of at the admission stage by a common order.

2. In all these writ petitions, the grievance of the petitioners is that they have submitted building permission applications on 26.08.2013 for construction of houses in their respective house sites situated at Shanthi Nagar Road, Narsampet, Warangal District, but so far, no orders are passed.

3. On instructions, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that though orally the petitioners were informed to submit fresh applications, but no orders are passed on the building permission applications submitted by them in the year 2013. No reasons are forthcoming as to why orders are not passed on the building permission applications, but only oral instructions were issued.

4. As fairly submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, there is nothing on record to show that the building permission applications were processed and having noticed certain deficiencies in submission of the building permission applications, the petitioners were intimated of the deficiencies and asked them to rectify. When the statutory authority is considering building permission applications, it is a bounden duty for him to put it in writing the reasons for non-processing the building permission applications giving further opportunity, if the matter requires further consideration or passing orders rejecting the request, but cannot correspond orally which is not borne out of record.

5. Having regard to the same, the Writ Petitions are disposed of directing the Commissioner, Nagara Panchayat, Narsampet, Warangal District (2nd respondent) to pass orders on the building permission applications submitted by the petitioners on 26.08.2013, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. _________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 21st September, 2015 Note: Issue C.C. tomorrow.

(B/o.) KL

WRIT PETITION Nos.30482, 30513, 30534, 30537 & 30547 of 2015 Date: 21st September, 2015 KL