Telangana High Court
WP/45737/2016 of Ponnepalli Venkata Chalapathi Vs Srikalahasti Municipality Srikalahasti, Chittoor on 29 December 2016
SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.45737 OF 2016 Dated:29.12.2016 Between: Ponnepalli Venkata Chalapathi, S/o. Late P. Gonvidaiah, Aged about 43 years, Occ: Advocate, R/o.D.No.9733, Gandla Street, Bahadurpet, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District .. Petitioner And Srikalahasti
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.
Conclusion
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.45737 OF 2016
Dated:29.12.2016
Between:
Ponnepalli Venkata Chalapathi, S/o. Late P. Gonvidaiah, Aged about 43 years, Occ: Advocate, R/o.D.No.9733, Gandla Street, Bahadurpet, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District .. Petitioner
And
Srikalahasti Municipality, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District, Rep., by its Commissioner and others .. Respondents The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.45737 OF 2016
ORDER:
Heard. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.
2. The petitioner alleges that his neighbours, the unofficial respondents herein, are undertaking construction without leaving any setbacks as per the norms of the Municipality and without obtaining building permission from the 1[st] respondent – Municipality. His grievance is that though he made a representation dated 08.12.2016 bringing the said fact to the notice of the authority concerned, no action has been taken so far. Hence, this writ petition.
3. Learned Standing Counsel for the 1[st] respondent – Municipality, on instructions, submits that the building permission application was made by the unofficial respondents through online portal and necessary permission was granted and they are undertaking construction in accordance with the building permission granted to them. He further submits that the construction is at the stage of digging of foundation pits and raising of pillars and thus there is no truth in the allegation made by the petitioner that the construction is in advance stage and setbacks are not observed.
4. In the light of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, the Writ Petition does not survive and the same is liable to be dismissed.
5. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, it is made clear that the 1[st] respondent – Municipality shall ensure that the unofficial respondents shall comply with the building permission norms and do not deviate from the permission granted to them causing hardship to the neighbours. 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:29.12.2016 KH