Telangana High Court
WP/27500/2007 of Mohd. Azam Ali, Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, on 24 December 2007
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 27500 of 2007 24.12.2007 Between: Mohd. Azam Ali … Petitioner AND Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Hyderabad & others … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Mohd. Zia-Ul-Haque Counsel for the
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No. 27500 of 2007
24.12.2007
Between:
Mohd. Azam Ali
… Petitioner
AND
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,Rep. by its Commissioner, Hyderabad & others … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Mohd. Zia-Ul-Haque Counsel for the respondents : Sri Sashidaran Naidu for Sri R. Ramachandra Reddy
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.
O R D E R:
This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare theaction of the respondents in not initiating the proceedings for acquiringthe petitioner’s land under the provisions of Section 147 of theHyderabad Municipalities Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) as illegal andarbitrary.
The only grievance of the petitioner is that respondent Nos. 1 and2 are seeking to take over his property, namely; house bearing No.1-4-788 situated at Bakaram, Hyderabad without initiating the proceedingsunder Section 147 of the Act, as evident from letter dated 12.12.2007issued by the Town Planning Section of respondent No.1-Corporation.
At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as the petitioner is not willing to part with his property by consent,as envisaged under Section 146 of the Act, the only alternativeavailable to the respondents, if they seek to acquire the property, is tofollow the procedure envisaged under Section 147 of the Act.
Sri Sashidaran Nair representing Sri R. Ramachandra Reddy,learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submitted thatif the petitioner is not willing to give his consent, as sought for underletter dated 12.12.2007, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 will not forciblydispossess him, without initiating proceedings under Section 147 ofthe Act.
In view of the statement made by the learned counsel, the writpetition is disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P. No. 35974of 2007 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of asinfructuous.
24.12.2007
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
ksld