Telangana High Court
WP/37283/2021 of Zaheer Ahmed Zakir Vs State of Telangna and 3 others on 30 December 2021
THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Originat Jurisdiction) THURSDAY , THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER WRIT PETITI ON NO: 37283 OF 2021 Between: AND lA NO: 1 OF 202'l Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. G MADHUSUDHAN
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD(Special Originat Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER
WRIT PETITI ON NO: 37283 OF 2021
Between:
Zaheer Ahmed Zakir, s/o Late lvohammed Jaffar aged about 6g years occ.business Rlo H.no.17-2-468, Kurmauda Saidabad, HyOeEbadbusiness Rlo H.no.17-2-468, Kurmauda Saidabad, HyOeEbad .,,PETITIONERYS
AND
1state of relangna, re! by its [principal ]secretary, Municipal Administration andUrban Development Department, Secretariat Hyderabad.Urban Development Department, Secretariat Hyderabad.2The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep by its Commissioner, TankBund Hyderabid.C.mmissioner, Circle No. 7, Charminar Zone Greater HyderabadBund Hyderabid.C.mmissioner, Circle No. 7, Charminar Zone Greater Hyderabad^Tj:."-,?gp-ytl Munrctpat corporation 4Abdul Mateen, S/o late M A.Saleem.aged about 35 years Occ. business rep byGPA holder Mohd Waseem S/otate M:A.Sateem ag6d about 30 yearc dci.' [-']GPA holder Mohd Waseem S/otate M:A.Sateem ag6d about 30 yearc dci.' [-']business R/o Hno. 17-02-419, Kurmaguda, SaidabiO Hyderabad.-- [- ][---]
...RESPONDENT/S
Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court miy 6e pleased tocircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court miy 6e pleased toissue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of wrii of mandamusdeclaring the action of the respondent No. 2 and 3 in trying to demolish the premisebearing No. 17-2-468 situated at Madannapet, Hyderabad even though the petitionerdeclaring the action of the respondent No. 2 and 3 in trying to demolish the premisebearing No. 17-2-468 situated at Madannapet, Hyderabad even though the petitionersubmitted the explanation on 10.12.2021 in pursuance of the notic6 issued by therespondent No. 3 vide No 468/UC/Tps/c7lcHRz/cHct{it2o21 dated 8.12.2021 andwithout passing any order as in collusion with the respondent No 4 as arbitrary andwithout passing any order as in collusion with the respondent No 4 as arbitrary andillegal and consequently to direct the respondents not to demolish the struitureswithout following the d ue process of law.without following the d ue process of law.
lA NO: 1 OF 202'l
Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in theaffidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct therespondent No. 2 and 3 not to demolish the any structures in pursuance of the noticeunder section 636 of HMC Act 1954 No 468/UC/TpslcTlcHRztc1cl{il2o21 datedrespondent No. 2 and 3 not to demolish the any structures in pursuance of the noticeunder section 636 of HMC Act 1954 No 468/UC/TpslcTlcHRztc1cl{il2o21 dated8.12.2021 pending disposal of the main writ petition pending disposal of the abovewrit petitionwrit petition Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. G MADHUSUDHAN REDDy Counsel for the Respondent No 1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV (TG)
Counsel for the Respondent No 2 to 3: SRI PASHAM KRTSHNA REDDY, SC FOR GHMC
Counsel for the Respondent No 4: -
The Gourt made the following: ORDER
THE HON,BLE [DT. ][JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER]
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:
This Writ Petition, [under ][Article ][226 ][of ][the ][Constitution ][of]India, is filed [by ][the ][petitioner, wherein ][the ][following prayer ][is]made:
"... to issue [writ ][order ][or ][direction more particularly one in ][the]nature of writ [of ][mandamus ][declaring ][the ][action ][of ][the]respondent [Nos ][2 ][and ][3 ][in ][trying ][to ][demolish ][the ][premises]bearing No.17-2-468 [situated ][at ][Madannapet' Hyderabad ][even]the [petitioner submitted the ][explanation ][on ][10'12 ][2021]though in pursuance [of ][the ][notice issued ][by ][the ][respondent ][No'3 ][vide]No.468/UC/TPS lC7 /CHRZ/GHCM/2021 [dated 08'12'2021 ][and]without [passing ][any order ][as ][in ][collusion ][with ][the ][respondent]No.4 as arbitrary [and ][illegal ][and ][consequently ][to ][direct ][the]respondents [not ][to ][demolish ][the ][structures ][without ][following]the due [process ][of ][law]and to Pass [such ][other order ][or]orders,,."
Heard the [learned counsel ][for ][the ][petitioner, ][learned]2, Government [Pleader ][for ][Municipal Administration ][and ][Urban]Development [appearing ][for ][respondent ][No'1' ][learned ][Standing]Counsel for [GHMC ][appearing ][for ][respondent ][Nos'2 ][and ][3 ][and]perused the record.
3. Learned counsel [for the ][petitioner would submit ][that ][the]explanation [dated ][10.12.2021 ][of ][the ][petitioner ][to the ][notice ][dated]ol,|2.2o2lhasnotbeenconsideredbyrespondentNo.3'Withoutconsidering [the ][said explanation and following ][the ][rule ][of law' ][the]respondent [corporation ][are ][trying ][to ][demolish ][the ][premises]belonging [to the ]Petitioner'
4. On the other hand, learned [Standing ][Counsel ][for ][GHMC]would submit that the respondent [corporation would examine ][the]explanation dated 10.12.2021 [of ][the ][petitioner and ][pass necessary]orders in accordance with [law.]
5. The said submission is taken on record.
6. Under these circumstances, the [respondent ][No.3 is ][directed]to consider the explanation dated [70.L2.2021 ][submitted ][by ][the]petitioner to the notice dated 08.12.2027 and [pass ]necessaryorders and take action in accordance [with ][law, expeditiously.]
7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition [is ]disposed of. [No]LU5L5.
lvliscellaneous [petitions pending, ]if any, shall stand [closed.]
SD/. N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAOASSISTANT REGITRAR,TRUE COPY//SECTION OFCER
To,
'1 . The Principal secretary, State of Telangna, I\/unicipal Administration and UrbanDevelopment Department, Secretariat Hyderabad.. The Principal secretary, State of Telangna, I\/unicipal Administration and UrbanDevelopment Department, Secretariat Hyderabad.2. The Commissioner Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank BundHyderabad.Hyderabad.
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Circle No. 7, Charminar Zone Greater HyderabadMunicipal corporationMunicipal corporation4. One CC to Sri. GUDI IVADHUSUDHAN REDDY Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CCs to GP for [Vluncipal Administration and Urban Development ,HighCourt for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]
6. Two CD Copies
7. One Spare Copy.
rsn/LSLS
HIGH COURT
DATED:3011212021
ORDERWP.No.37283 [ol ][2021]
DISPOSING [OF ][THE WRIT PETITION]WITHOUT [COSTS]
\''L.to
(vtrllo0 5 tlt't [2022]I\ [t->]t.>'ll\.&OFqD5aC