Koyilada Venkatarao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5847 AP

            HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

                 MAIN CASE No:W.P.No.27645 OF 2022

                            PROCEEDING SHEET

SL.           DATE                           ORDER                            OFFICE
NO.                                                                            NOTE
                       RNT,J
1.        30.08.2022

                       1.      Sri V.V.Satish, learned counsel for the
                       petitioner submits that the respondent Nos.3 and 4

obtained building permission for construction in Sy.No.5/1 and 5/2, but they are raising construction in Sy.No.6 belonging to the petitioner. Raising the said grievance, the petitioner filed Spandana application on 21.02.2022 requesting to verify the municipal records and revenue records properly, but till date, no action has been taken. He submits that in view of Section 450 of the Municipal Corporation Act as also the judgment of this Court in the case of Mirza Khusru Ali Baig vs. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation1, the respondent No.2 has the jurisdiction to determine, if the construction is being raised on the survey number for which the building permission is granted or it is being exceeded.

2. Sri S.Lakshmi Narayana, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2, prays for and is granted two (02) weeks time to obtain instructions.

    (2013) 2 ALD 785
 SL.   DATE                         ORDER                                OFFICE
NO.                                                                      NOTE
             3.    Post on 13.09.2022.

4. In the meantime, it will be open for the respondent No.2 to consider the petitioner's Spandana application dated 21.02.2022 in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties, if the same has already not been decided.

________ RNT,J Scs