THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
W.A. No.882 of 2023
JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY)
Heard Mr. V.S.R.M.V.Prasad Sanaka, learned counsel appearing
for the appellant, B.L.Kanakavalli, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development i.e.,
respondent No.2. Perused the material on record.
2. The present writ appeal has been filed assailing the order dated 15.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.14881 of 2023. The writ petition was filed by the petitioner alleging certain illegal construction said to have been made by respondent Nos.4 and 5. The present Writ Appeal has been filed by the 5th respondent in the said writ petition. The Court while disposing of the writ petition at the admission stage has made the following observations:
In that view of the matter, without going into the merits of the case, the respondents No.2 and 3 are directed to consider the representation dated 20.04.2023 addressed to the 2nd respondent and dated 14.10.2022 and 23.09.2012 addressed to the 3rd respondent stated to have made by the petitioner, and after putting notice to all the concerned parties, pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner.2
3. A bare perusal of the operative part of the order would clearly indicate that the writ petition was disposed of in the light of the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority and also for the Shamshabad Municipalities. The two counsels had assured that any representation or objection that the writ petitioner has filed, the same shall be duly considered. The Writ Court while disposing of the writ petition had made a categorical observation that the 3rd respondent if it initiates any proceedings, shall proceed after putting notice to all the concerned parties and only thereafter pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law.
4. This observation by the learned Single Judge would clearly give an indication that the writ court as such has not decided upon any issue, rather has disposed of the writ petition leaving it for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to take appropriate decision, in accordance with law. Nonetheless, in the course of taking the decision, the authorities concerned are expected to give a reasonable and fair opportunity of hearing after notices are issued to all the concerned or affected parties if any.
3
5. The appellant if at all falls within the directions given by the Writ Court, it goes without saying that the authorities are required to issue notice to the appellant herein before passing of any appropriate orders, in respect of the illegal construction alleged to have been made by the appellant who is the respondent No.5 in the writ petition. We do not find any illegality or perversity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition, nor do we find the impugned order to be adverse to the interest of the appellant herein.
6. The Writ Appeal, therefore, fails and is accordingly rejected. It is however made clear that, in the event, if any action is proposed or undertaken by respondents No.3 and 4 in the present appeal, the appellant herein would have her legal rights protected to avail the same in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
7. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this writ appeal, shall stand closed.
_________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J ________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J 23.09.2023 AQS/HFM 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. LAXMI NARAYANA WA No.882 of 2023 (per the Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) 23.09.2023 AQS/HFM