Dokkari Muthyalamma v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented Through Its

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY W.P.No.7469 of 2015

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for R1 and Sri S. Laxminarayana Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for R2.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of 2nd respondent in granting permission to one Hanumantha Rao during the pendency of the suit in O.S.No.1004 of 2013 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, vide proceedings dated 22.08.2014, as illegal and arbitrary.

3. A perusal of the impugned proceedings shows that the building permission was granted to one M.Hanumantha Rao, who is not arrayed as party to this writ petition. The basic requirement for maintaining a writ petition is that the affected party in whose favour the impugned order is passed has to be made as a party. It is unfortunate that the basic requirement of impleading said Hanumantha Rao as party to this writ petition is not taken care of by the petitioner's counsel.

4. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand dismissed.

_______________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY,J 23rd March, 2015 sj