Telangana High Court
WP/27406/2005 of O. Naganna S/o O. Venkatappa Vs the Cuddapah Municipal Corporation of on 23 December 2005
SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO.27406 OF 2005 DATED:23.12.2005 Between: O. Naganna …Petitioner And The Municipal Corporation of Cuddapah Cuddapah, Rep. by its Commissioner, and others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO.27406 OF
WRIT PETITION NO.27406 OF 2005
DATED:23.12.2005
Between:O. Naganna
And
The Municipal Corporation of CuddapahCuddapah, Rep. by its Commissioner,and others …Petitioner …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.27406 OF 2005
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:
The petitioner is resident of Kadapa town. He is owner of premises bearingNos.2/367, 2/368, 2/368 (1 to 7) situated at Balaji Nagar. It appears that KadapaMunicipal Council passed a resolution on 14.10.2005 proposing to widen roads inKadapa town. The petitioner alleges that officials of first respondent came to thepetitioner’s property and marked a portion for demolition for the purpose of wideningroad. Therefore, placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in P. LakshmanaRao v. Executive Officer, Gram Panchayat present Writ Petition is filed seeking adirection to the respondents not to demolish the petitioner’s premises.
Learned Standing Counsel for Kadapa Municipal Corporation, Sri S.I.Newton, aftergetting instructions submits that pursuant to resolution of Kadapa Municipal Council, six committees were formed and the matter is under consideration. He furthersubmits that the officials of the Kadapa Municipal Corporation have not visited thepetitioner’s premises nor any marking was made.
After considering the rival submissions, this Court is of considered opinion that theWrit Petition is filed on mere apprehension without there being any concrete stepstaken by the Kadapa Municipal Corporation. However, if the land of the petitioner isto be acquired, the Corporation shall have to necessarily follow the procedurecontemplated either under Section 146 or under Section 147 of the HyderabadMunicipal Corporation Act, 1955, which is applicable to Kadapa MunicipalCorporation also.
The Writ Petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed.
_______________
23.12.2005 (V.V.S.RAO, J)
bnr