Telangana High Court
WA/1660/2014 of K. Saraswathi, W/o. K.Satyanarayana Raju, Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation on 30 December 2014
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1660 of 2014 Date: 30.12.2014 Between: K. Saraswathi … Appellant And The
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABADFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRAPRADESH
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No. 1660 of 2014
Date: 30.12.2014
Between:
K. Saraswathi
… Appellant
And
The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,Rep., by its Commissioner,Hyderabad & others.
… Respondents
This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No. 1660 of 2014
JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This appeal is sought to be preferred by the 3[rd] respondent in thewrit petition against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge,whereby His Lordship was pleased to allow the writ petition, wherein thefollowing prayer is made.
“… to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction moreparticularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring theaction of the first and second respondents in not taking any action forremoval of unauthorized construction made by the third respondentas illegal and invalid and consequently direct the first and secondrespondents to remove the unauthorized constructions made on thefourth floor of KSR Complex situated at HIG 457, Phase VI, KPHBcolony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad.”
The learned Single Judge on fact found that the fourth floor inthis case was constructed without having any plan or sanction orpermission whatsoever and such floor was used gainfully and profitablyletting out to third parties. The appellant did not dispute the fact thatthere has been no sanction or permission.
In view of the above fact finding and the admitted position we areunable to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. Moreover,learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that action hasbeen taken for demolition of the offending floor and such demolition is notcomplete. Obviously, when the Corporation authorities have takenaction it will be completed in due course.
We do not want to interfere with the judgment and order of thelearned Single Judge and accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. However,after demolition of the entire floor, it would be open for the appellant, if soadvised, to apply for sanction of the additional floor in accordance withlaw, and the Corporation authorities, on receipt of such application, shallconsider the same in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity ofhearing to the appellant and also to the writ petitioners and take adecision within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy ofthe application. Notice shall also be given to all the persons concernedunder the law. The municipal Corporation will not be prejudiced andinfluenced by the observations made by the learned Single Judge andproceed with the matter in accordance with law.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also standdismissed. No order as to costs.
___________________
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
Date: 30.12.2014ES
___________________
SANJAY KUMAR, J