Telangana High Court
WP/3914/2008 of Sri Udaya Kumar, Vs The Municipal Corporation Of Karimnagar on 30 December 2013
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 3914 OF 2008 DATE: 30.12.2013 Between: Sri Udaya Kumar & another. … Petitioners And The Municipal Corporation
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, ANDHRA PRADESH ATHYDERABAD
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No. 3914 OF 2008
DATE: 30.12.2013
Between:
Sri Udaya Kumar& another.
… Petitioners
And
The Municipal Corporation of Karimnagar,Rep., by its Commissioner,Karimnagar, Karimnagar District.
… Respondents
This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No. 3914 of 2008
ORDER:(Per the Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of appropriate writ, order ordirection more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus directingthe respondent to maintain the municipal park known as “Nehru Park”situated at Vavilalpally, Karimnagar and to create facilities for children in theconstructed area in the park and to take necessary measures to secure totalpark area of 6,655 square yards.
It is alleged in the petition that the aforesaid park is not beingmaintained and used and some unauthorized persons encroached andoccupied the park and being used for some other purpose.
In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, it is stated that there isno scope for any encroachment at present, as the park has been bounded bya boundary wall. However, a portion of the park has been segregated forcommunity purposes including marriages.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that previouslythe writ Court passed an order directing the respondent - MunicipalCorporation to maintain the park in accordance with law. However, theaforesaid decision was not carried out.
After taking note of the statement made in the counter affidavit, we findthat at present there is no scope for any encroachment, since the park hasbeen secured by the boundary wall. However, we noticed that a portion ofthe park has been earmarked for the use of community purposes. Wetherefore direct the respondent not to use or allot any portion of the park for any purpose other than the use for children park, as it was establishedinitially and the portion, which is being used for other purpose i.e., communityhall, shall be removed and restored back to the main area of the park. Accordingly, the walls and structures erected must be demolished andrestricted to bring its original fold.
It is stated in the counter affidavit that the playing infrastructure forchildren was already provided in the open space around the structure and itis proposed for the indoor games and children recreation after completion ofthe building work. We therefore direct the respondent to complete the saidbuilding work so that the children can use it for indoor games. The entireexercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date ofcommunication of this order.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
_____________________
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
____________________
SANJAY KUMAR, J