Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sadguru Infratech vs Konathala Govindarajulu on 9 February, 2024
Author: R. Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R. Raghunandan Rao
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
I.A.No.1 of 2024
In
WRIT APPEAL No.668 of 2023
Between:
Sadguru Infratech Rep. by its Managing Partner,
Suneel Mahanthy, S/o. Sivaprasad Mahanthy,
Aged about 46 years, Occ: Business,
Sadguru Towers, PM Palem Visakhapatnam,
Visakhapatnam District.
...Applicant/Appellant
Versus
Konathala Govindarajulu,
S/o.Late K. Appa Rao,
Aged about 57 years,
Occ: Business, D.No.14-21-11,
Rythu Sangham Veedhi,
Nidanam Doddi Anakapalli,
Visakhapatnam District & others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant :M/s. Bharadwaj Associates
Rep.by Sri Vedula Venkata
Ramana, learned Senior
Counsel
Counsel for respondents 1 & 2 :Smt. T.V. Sri Devi
Counsel for respondent No.3 :G.P for Municipal
Administration & Urban
Development
Counsel for respondent Nos.4&6 : Sri K. Madhava Reddy,
Standing Counsel for GVMC
2
HCJ&RRR,J
I.A. No.1 of 2024 in WA.668 of 2023
Counsel for respondent No.5 : Sri V. Surya Kiran Kumar,
Standing Counsel for VMRDA
Counsel for respondent No.7 : ---
ORDER
Dt: 09.02.2024
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)
Heard M/s. Bharadwaj Associates, represented by Sri Vedula
Venkata Ramana, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant
and Smt. T.V. Sri Devi, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2,
Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban
Development, appearing for respondent No.3, Sri K. Madhava Reddy,
learned Standing Counsel for GVMC appearing for respondent Nos.4 & 6
and Sri V. Surya Kiran Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for VMRDA
appearing for respondent No.5.
2. Respondents 1 and 2 had filed W.P.No. 34563 of 2022
declaring the actions of the Greater Visakhapatam Municipal
Corporation and the Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region
Development Authority in granting building permit order bearing
Permit No.1086/2996/B/Z4/BEM/2020 dated 23.07.2022 to
respondents 5 and 6 in the Writ Petition, for construction of a
building in an extent of 1500 sq.yards in Sy.No.11/4 of
HCJ&RRR,J
I.A. No.1 of 2024 in WA.668 of 2023
Buchirajupalem Village near Gopalapatnam Mandal,
Visakhapatnam, pending certain objections raised by respondents 1
and 2 and pending status quo orders passed in I.A.No.69 of 2020 in
O.S.No.737 of 2018 on the file of V Additional Junior Civil Judge,
Visakhapatnam and O.S.No.792 of 2018 on the file of Principal
Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. Respondent No.6 in the Writ
Petition is the applicant in the present application.
3. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by an order dated
19.06.2023, after hearing of the affected parties including the
applicant, was pleased to allow the Writ Petition in the following
manner.
"In the result, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the
building permission granted to the respondents 5 and 6 vide
permit No.1086/2996/B/Z4/BEM/2020 dated 23.07.2022 by
the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation.
It is further directed that if any application is filed for
grant of building permit order with respect to the property in
question, the GVMC shall provide opportunity of hearing to
the petitioners and keeping in view this judgment shall
consider any such application".
4. Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant herein moved
W.A.No.668 of 2023 before this Court. This appeal was withdrawn
on 04.08.2023, by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant.
HCJ&RRR,J
I.A. No.1 of 2024 in WA.668 of 2023
Thereafter, the present application has been filed for recall of the
order, dated 04.08.2023, dismissing the Writ Appeal as withdrawn.
5. Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, the learned Senior Counsel
representing M/s. Bharadwaj Associates would contend that the
withdrawal of the appeal was a mistake in as much as the order of
the learned Single Judge, extracted above was not a case of simple
order of remand but was a case of a direction to the respondent
authorities to consider any fresh application strictly in terms of the
observations made in the order of the learned Single Judge and
such observations would effectively non-suit the applicant in any
fresh application that may be made before the respondent
authorities.
6. Smt. T. V. Sridevi, learned counsel for respondents 1
and 2 would submit that the order dismissing the Writ Appeal, as
withdrawn, was passed on 04.08.2023. Thereafter, the applicant
had moved a representation, dated 10.08.2023, for
restoration/ratification of the earlier building permission and had
also filed W.P.No.452 of 2024 before this Court on 05.01.2024, for a
direction to the respondent authorities to consider and pass orders
favourably in terms of the representation of the applicant dated
10.08.2023. She submits that a learned Single Judge of this Court
had ordered notice in the Writ Petition on 08.02.2024. She would
HCJ&RRR,J
I.A. No.1 of 2024 in WA.668 of 2023
submit that the applicant having filed a representation, after the
dismissal of the Writ appeal, and after filing a Writ Petition to direct
the respondent authorities to pass an order in favour of the
applicant, cannot now seek an order of recall on the earlier order of
the Division Bench dated 04.08.2023.
7. In view of the factual situation mentioned above, it is
clear that the applicant after suffering the order of dismissal of the
Writ Appeal as withdrawn, on 04.08.2023, had accepted the said
order and had taken steps in the light of the said order. Thereafter,
the applicant had also moved this Court again for early disposal of a
representation made, on the basis of the orders of the learned Single
Judge in the Writ Petition. It may also be noted that W.P.No.454 of
2024 was moved on 05.01.2024 and thereafter, the present
application for recall was moved on 08.01.2024.
8. The above conduct of the applicant of trying to obtain
benefit under the orders of the leaned Single Judge as well as
seeking recall of the order of dismissal by the Division Bench clearly
disentitles the applicant for any relief from this Court.
9. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
RJS
HCJ&RRR,J
I.A. No.1 of 2024 in WA.668 of 2023
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
In
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)
09.02.2024
RJS
HCJ&RRR,J
I.A. No.1 of 2024 in WA.668 of 2023
