Saudagar Mohammed Altaf vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4408 AP

        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

                WRIT PETITION No.26748 of 2022


JUDGMENT:-


1.    Heard    Sri.    J.U.M.V.   Prasad,    learned   counsel    for   the

petitioner   and      learned   Government     Pleader   for     Municipal

Administration for the respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri. Kalava Suresh

Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

has been filed for the following relief:-

" ...declaring the action of the Respondents in not granting building permission to the petitioner in the place of his demolished portion of H No 40/808F in Sy.No.126, Srinivasa Nagar Kurnool by blocking entire extent of Sy.No.126, vide 3rd respondents Endorsement Roc No G2/476045/2022 dated 22042022 though the same is not the subject matter of WA 696/2016 and Batch as illegal malafide colourable exercise of power and in violation of Art 19 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to grant building permission to the petitioners above mentioned property by setting aside the said endorsement and to pass.."

3. By order dated 14.09.2022, this Court provided that the

Commissioner/respondent No.3, shall consider the petitioner's

representation dated 28.09.2022 and 24.12.2022 but the order so

passed shall not be given effect to without the orders of this Court.

4. Sri. Kalava Suresh Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the

respondent No.3 submits that pursuant to the interim order dated

14.09.2022, the Commissioner, Kurnool Municipal Corporation

has passed fresh order vide Roc.No.G2/476045/2022, dated

02.05.2023, rejecting the petitioner's representations by observing

that the building permission cannot be granted for construction in

the said land situated in Sy.No.126 of ECM High School compound

at present.

5. The copy of the said order is annexed to the additional

counter affidavit of respondent No.3.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh

order has been passed on the same ground as earlier order, which

was impugned in the present writ petition, but to bring on record

all the factual events in one petition and the combined relief with

respect to the previous order as also fresh order, liberty may be

granted to the petitioner to challenge the said order, as also with

respect to the grievance raised in the present writ petition, by filing

fresh petition.

7. Sri. Kalava Suresh Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the

respondent No.3, has no objection to the said prayer.

8. Accordingly, granting the liberty as prayed for, this writ

petition is disposed of, without affecting the right of the petitioner

to raise such ground as raised in the present petition and to

challenge the order impugned in this writ petition. No order as to

costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending,

shall also stand closed.

__________________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J Date: 21.09.2023 PSA4445555464

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

WRIT PETITION No.26748 of 2022

Date: 21.09.2023

PSA