Telangana High Court
WP/27774/2008 of Mohd Waseem Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation on 31 December 2009
R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27774 OF 2008 Date : 31.12.2009 Between: Mohd. Waseem. …… Petitioner And The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep. by its Commissioner & another. …..Respondents. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.27774 OF 2008
Date : 31.12.2009
Between:
Mohd. Waseem.
…… Petitioner
And
The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,rep. by its Commissioner & another.
…..Respondents.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY
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:
WRIT PETITION No.27774 OF 2008
In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way ofMandamus, directing the respondents not to take steps for takingpossession of the shop in the ground floor of the premises bearingMunicipal No.22-5-719, admeasuring 114 square feet, pursuant to thenotice, dated 20.07.2005, issued in LetterNo.550/RW/ACP/C1/MCH/2005.
2. The petitioner claims ownership and possession with regard toa shop in the ground floor of the premises bearing Municipal No.22-5-719, admeasuring 114 square feet, along with an undivided share of 6.30 square yards, situated at Chowk Maidan Khan, near Panjeshah,Hyderabad. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitionerthat though he has purchased part of the said property, respondentsare taking steps for its demolition, pursuant to the notice, dated20.07.2005, issued in Letter No.550/RW/ACP/C1/MCH/2005. Theaforesaid letter is addressed to one Smt.Jayanti Dalmiya, by the 2[nd]respondent, stating that the respondents have undertaken a proposalfor widening of the road from Gulzar house to Royal Function Hall,and in the said process, an extent of 20.21 square yards of land in thepremises bearing No.22-5-719 is being affected, as such, theaddressee was requested to hand over possession of the same.
3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned StandingCounsel appearing for the respondents.
4. So far as petitioner is concerned, it is not in dispute that hehas purchased a part of the property in the premises bearing No.22-5-719. For the purpose of widening of the road, the respondents maytake possession of property by negotiating with the owners of suchproperty and obtaining their consent, or by initiating the landacquisition proceedings. In this case, when a part of the property inquestion is already purchased by the petitioner by way of a registeredsale deed, dated 21[st] of September 2004, he cannot be dispossessed,by addressing the previous owner.
5. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is disposed of,directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner or dismantlehis shop in the ground floor of the premises bearing No.22-5-719,admeasuring 114 square feet, without following due process of law.
However, this order will not preclude the respondents either to takesteps by negotiations with the petitioner or to take steps inaccordance with the Land Acquisition Act, to acquire the property,which is required for road widening.
6. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposedof. No order as to costs.
_____________________
R.SUBHASH REDDY, J
31[st] December 2009
ajr