Telangana High Court
WP/25016/2004 of B. Sambamurthy, Vs The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, on 31 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 25016 of 2004 Between: 1 B. Sambamurthy, s/o Late B. Bheemaiah, r/o Flat No. 101, Kaveri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 25016 of 2004
Between:
1 B. Sambamurthy, s/o Late B. Bheemaiah, r/o Flat No. 101, Kaveri Block, Divyasakthi House, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad.2 B. Ravindra Babu, s/o Late B. Bheemaiah, R/o House No.10-3-375 (50/2RT), Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad.
..... PETITIONERS
AND
1 The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.
2 The Additional Commissioner (West), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
3 The Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Circle No.4, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
4 B. Nandakumar, S/o Late Bheemaiah, R/o H.No. 10-3-375 (50/2RT), Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus, declaring the notice issued bythe 1st respondent (MCH) dated 20-12-2004 u/s 452 of HMC Act is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to directions issued inW.P. No.21738/04, dated 29-11-2004 and violative of principles of natural justiceand consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 and their staff not to demolish anystructures in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 20-12-2004.
For the Petitioner: MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: MR.RAMA RAO GANTA, SC for MCH
For the Respondent No.4: --
The Court at the stage of admission made the following :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel forMunicipal Corporation of Hyderabad and with their consent the writ petition itself isdisposed of at the stage of admission.
The petitioners 1 and 2 and respondent No.4 claim to be brothers and entered into asettlement for development of the house owned by them in Qtr. bearing No.50/2RT,House No.10-3-375, situated at Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad and entrusted theconstruction work to a private construction agency. The petitioners state thatrespondent No.4 filed W.P. No.21738 of 2004, alleging certain irregularities in theconstruction and complaining the inaction on the part of officials of the MunicipalCorporation of Hyderabad in taking action thereon, wherein this Court by orderdated 29-11-2004 directed the officials of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad toconsider the representation stated to have been filed by respondent No.4 herein,dated 31-1-2004 and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. Thegrievance of the petitioners is that contrary to the direction in W.P. No.21738 of2004, the first respondent herein issued the impugned show-cause notice dated 20-12-2004 under Section 452 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act directingthem to submit their explanation in respect of the violations in the construction.Questioning the impugned notice, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate todirect the petitioners to submit proper explanation within three weeks from today tothe impugned show-cause notice, dated 20-12-2004 issued by the first respondent, and on such filing, the first respondentshall consider the explanation and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordancewith law, and shall proceed further in the matter as per the decision taken thereon.Till such time, the parties shall maintain status quo existing as on today.
With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
No costs.
Date: 31-12-2004
Note:
Issue operative portion by wire at party’s cost.
(Bo)
Svv
______________
N.V. RAMANA, J
To
Issues
1 The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, , Tank Bund, Hyderabad.Tank Bund, Hyderabad.
2 The Additional Commissioner (West), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. Hyderabad, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
3 The Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Circle No.4, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.Circle No.4, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.
4 Two CD copies.