Banoth Padma v. The State Of Telangana
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
[3230 I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FR]DAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE SN{T JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO: 46688 OF 2022 Betrveen:
Banoth Padma, Wo. Balaji, Occ. Household, fuo. H. No. 8-733, Laxmipuram, Konijarla Mandal, Khammam District.
...PETITIONER AND The State ofTelangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, at Hyderabad. The Khammam Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Cornmissioner, at Khammam'
...RESP.NDENTS l.
2.
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issuc Writ or Direction preferably Writ of Mandamus, declaring the notice issued by the Respondent No. 2 vide Letter No. 198002/KHAM/ 141512022 dated l5-09-2022 as illegal, arbitrary, without authority and violative ol'principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and declare the permission grantcd earlier is valid. IA NO F 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of notice issued by the Respondent No. 2 vide Letter No. I 98002/KHAM/ | 41 5 /2022 dated | 5 -09'2022. Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRl. KOWTURU PAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Thc Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITIIA I<ANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION No.4668a of 2022 ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliel ' ... to issue Writ or Direction preferably Writ of Mandamus declaring the notice issued by the Respondent No.2 vide L€tter No.198002/KHAM/L4tS/2022 dated tS_Og_2O22 as i11ega1, arbitrary, without authority and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and declare the permission granted earlier is va_lid arrd .....,,. 2.
Heard Mr. Kor,lturu pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. p. Sreeedhar Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipatity. Both the learned counsels submit that the issue in this Writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 13.72.2021 in Writ petition No. 20398 of 2O2l and batch wherein this Court considered the issue at length and passed directions therein at paras 12 and, 13 and the portion of the said directions that are upheld by the Division Bench of this court vide judgement d,ated 08.12.2022 in Writ Appeal No.798 of 2022 are extracted hereunder: "
12. In view. of the above, this Court is of the opinion that in order to justify the action taken by the respondent authorities in revoking the building permission of the petitioners, they ought to have acted fairly and in strict adherence to the principles of natural justice. However, since the learned Special Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the impugned revocarion letters passed against the petitioners stand *iJ_ra..*,r, ; ;; extent of revocation of permission to construct buildings, the said .submission is placed on record. The impugned r.,rfcatio., i \
W.P.No.456BB oi 2022 letters passed by the respondent authorities against the petitioners stand withdrawn to the extent of revocation of permission to construct buildings, in terms of submissions made by the learned Special Government pleader. The petitioners are directecl to submit their explanations to the objections pointed out in the impugned revocation letters to the respondent authorities within a period of two weeks from today. On such submission of explanations by the petitioners, the respondent authorities are entitled to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with the provisions of TS-bpASS Act and the Rules made thereunder, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of such explanationi. It is made clear that until passing of orders by the respondent authorities within the time prescribed on the explanations submitted by the petitioners, the petitioners shall not proceed with any t5,pe of constructions in their respective subject lands.
3.
In view of the above, the Writ petition is a_llowed setting aside the revocation orders dated lS.Og .2022 . The respondents are directed to follow the guidelines/directions issued by this court in writ Appeal No.79B of 2022 dated oB. 72.2022 and writ Petition No.2O398 of 2O2l and batch, dated 13. 12.2021 and pass orders in accordance with law. The petitioner shall be given an opportunity of personal hearing. There shall be no order as to costs. 4.
Miscellaneous Applications, if any, shall stand SD/.L.SHIVA PARVATHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR IrSECTION OFFICER automatically closed I //TRUE COPY// To, I . The Principal Secretary. Municipal Administration and. Urban Development Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana- at Hydc;:'-trad.
2. Thi Commissioner, Klrammam lr4unicipal Corporation- at Khammam.
3. One CC to SRl. KOWTURU PAVANkUMAR Advocate [OPUC]
4. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV 'High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]
5. Two CD Copies
HIGH COURT LKJ DATED: 3011212022 WP.No. 46688 of 2022 fr rE sr47i q 3tl J AtI 'lL
ORDER
WRIT PETITION IS ALLOWED WITIIOUT COSTS