Telangana High Court
WP/20941/2008 of M/s. Mahalakshmi Art Printers, Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, on 30 December 2009
Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy Writ Petition No.20941 of_2008 Order: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner, a proprietary concern, seeks declaration, by way of mandamus, that the action of the respondents, in taking steps for demolition of its shop situated in premises bearing
The Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash 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.
Order:
Writ Petition No.20941 of_2008
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner, a proprietaryconcern, seeks declaration, by way of mandamus, that theaction of the respondents, in taking steps for demolition ofits shop situated in premises bearing No.8-3-949/3, Punjagutta, Ameerpet, Hyderbad, asotherwise than by due process of law, as illegal andarbitrary.
The petitioner claims that it is a tenant in the groundfloor of the above said premises and that the first andsecond floors are in occupation of the owners thereof. It isthe grievance of the petitioner that under the guise ofwidening of National Highway No.9 at Punjagutta,Hyderabad, the respondents are taking steps for demolitionof its shop, without any valid reasons and without issuingprior notice and opportunity to it.
Though no counter-affidavit is filed, on writteninstructions given by the Assistant City Planner, Circle X,Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (for short ‘theGHMC’), it is submitted by learned Standing Counsel forthe respondents that the GHMC is taking steps to take overthe properties, which are required for the purpose of roadwidening, by private negotiations and by extending thebenefits as per G.O.Ms.No.483 Municipal Administration,dated 24[th] August, 1998. It is further submitted that the petitioner is running printing press as tenant in the groundfloor of the abovesaid premises and the upper floors are inthe occupation of the owners and that the building inquestion is being affected to the extent of 25 feet x 35 feetin an area of 97.22 square yards and as such, notices wereserved on the owner as well as the tenant thereof. Ultimately, it is undertaken that the possession of theproperty in question will be taken for demolition only afterobtaining consent from its owner as well as the tenant.
Recording the same, the Writ Petition is disposed ofdirecting the respondents not to dispossess the petitionerfrom the property in question, which is in its occupation andis stated to be affected in road widening, without obtainingits consent for demolition and without following the dueprocess of law.
Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition isdisposed of. No order as to costs.
Dated 30[th] December, 2009lur
_________________
R.Subhash Reddy, J