Telangana High Court
WP/27469/2005 of S.C. Anoop S/o S. Chittaranjan Vs Kurnool Municipal Corporation Kurnool rep by on 26 December 2005
SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.27469 OF 2005 Dt.26.12.2005 Between: S.C.Anoop and another … Petitioners And Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool, rep. by its Commissioner. … Respondent ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel on behalf
W.P.NO.27469 OF 2005Dt.26.12.2005Between:S.C.Anoop and another … PetitionersAndKurnool Municipal Corporation,Kurnool, rep. by its Commissioner. … Respondent
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:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learnedcounsel on behalf of the respondent.
The petitioners submit that they are the owners of land to anextent of Ac.0.33 Cents situated in Survey No.64/2 at Kurnool andthey have submitted an application on 17.5.2005 seeking permissionto construct a residential building and based on the said applicationthe respondent issued an endorsement in B.A.No.80/2005/G-2 dated13.9.2005 requesting the petitioner to fulfill the ten conditionsmentioned therein. As against the said endorsement dated13.9.2005, the petitioners made a representation on 20.9.2005requesting the petitioner to furnish information as to the provision oflaw under which various amounts mentioned in items 1 to 9 are liableto be paid. It is stated that without furnishing any provision of law orrelevant rules the respondent is insisting that unless the said conditions are fulfilled permission to construct the building will not besanctioned.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thepetitioners have no objection to pay any amount required underrelevant provision of law, but without mentioning the relevantprovision of law insisting of such payments and insisting to handovercertain extent of land of 10% of the open space cost as per marketvalue may not be justified. The learned counsel also submits that hehas also filed W.P.No.27468 of 2005 questioning condition No.10 ofthe endorsement dated 13.9.2005 as the legal requirement wasalready shown.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I amof the opinion that it is just and proper to direct the respondent tofurnish the relevant provision of law for fulfilling condition Nos.1 to 9 inthe impugned endorsement dated 13.9.2005. Accordingly, therespondent is directed to furnish the relevant provision of law forfulfilling condition Nos.1 to 9 by the petitioners within four weeks.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
__________________
(V.ESWARAIAH, J.)
26.12.2005
kpr