THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.773 of 2022
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. L.Bhargava Krishna, learned counsel for the
appellant; Mr. D.Satyanarayana, learned counsel for
respondent No.1/writ petitioner; Mr. Nazir Ahmed Khan,
learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department for respondent Nos.2 to 6; and Mr. R.Chandra Shekhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.7 & 8.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 08.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.35189 of 2022 filed by the 1st respondent as the writ petitioner.
3. 1st respondent has filed the related writ petition alleging inaction on the part of respondent Nos.4 to 8 in 2 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.773 of 2022 allowing alleged unauthorized construction by the appellant in the premises bearing H.No.16-51, situated at Bibipet Village and Mandal in Kamareddy District. An interlocutory application being I.A.No.1 of 2022 was filed seeking interim direction to the official respondents to stop the construction work made by the appellant.
4. On 08.09.2022, the following order was passed by the learned Single Judge:
"Notice before admission.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to take out personal notice to respondent No.8 by Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due and file proof of service in the Registry.
Sri M. Ram Gopal Rao, the learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, has stated that no building permission has been granted to the respondent No.8.
Having regard to the above made submission, the respondent No.6-Gram Panchayat is directed to stop the construction being made by the respondent No.8 in the subject property.
3 HCJ & CVBRJ
W.A.No.773 of 2022
Print the name of Sri M. Ram Gopal Rao, the learned Standing Counsel, and post on 21.09.2022."
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that learned Single Judge had passed interim direction to stop construction made by the appellant without hearing the appellant. Appellant had sought for building permission but no decision was taken thereon within the prescribed period. Therefore, appellant had proceeded on the basis of deemed permission as contemplated under the statute.
6. On going through the order dated 08.09.2022 as extracted above, we find that the related writ petition is still pending before the learned Single Judge and only an interim direction was issued to the Gram Panchayat to stop the construction made by the appellant on the subject property. It is open to the appellant to ventilate his grievance and urge all available grounds before the learned Single Judge, which would be considered by the learned Single Judge on their own merit. We do not find the present to be a fit case where we 4 HCJ & CVBRJ W.A.No.773 of 2022 should entertain the appeal against an interlocutory order passed by the learned Single Judge in a pending writ petition.
7. Giving liberty to the appellant as such, Writ Appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
8. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.
__________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ___________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J Date: 29.11.2022 KL