Mohammed Riyaz vs The State Of Telangana

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4177 Tel
Judgement Date : 17 August, 2022

Telangana High Court
Mohammed Riyaz vs The State Of Telangana on 17 August, 2022
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                      AND
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY


                 Writ Appeal No.503 of 2022

JUDGMENT:    (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)



     Heard Mr. R. Dheeraj Singh, learned counsel for the

appellant; learned Government Pleader for Municipal

Administration and Urban Development appearing for

respondent No.1; learned Government Pleader for Revenue

appearing for respondent No.2; Ms. M. Bhagyasri, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4; and Mr. Kadaru Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

2. This intra-court appeal has been preferred assailing the final order dated 09.06.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.No.22918 of 2020 filed by the appellant/writ petitioner.

3. Appellant had filed the related writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the 4th respondent i.e., Commissioner (Revenue Branch), Khammam Municipal 2 Corporation, in passing mutation orders in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of House No.8-1-265 in Roc.No.R1/241243/Revenue/2020 as illegal and arbitrary. He therefore sought quashing of the same.

4. Respondents contested the writ petition by filing counter affidavits.

5. Learned Single Judge declined to entertain the writ petition, but granted liberty to the appellant to avail the alternative remedy.

6. From a perusal of the order dated 09.06.2022, we find that learned Single Judge has commented on the merit of the appellant's case, but at the same time relegated the appellant to the forum of alternative remedy.

7. In the hearing today, learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant would approach the 4th respondent seeking revocation of the mutation order.

8. In view of the above, we make it clear that observations and findings rendered by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition shall not come in the way of examination of any grievance raised by the appellant before the 4th respondent. Those observations 3 and directions may be treated as only tentative; for the purpose of deciding the maintainability of the writ petition.

9. Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 17.08.2022 JSU