M. Shashidharan Raju vs The State Of Telangana And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 6570 Tel

       HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                     WRIT PETITION No.44034 of 2022

O R D E R:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

"...to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to direct respondent No 2 to consider Petitioners representation Dated 16/11/2022 and Pass ..."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. M. Ratan Singh submits that

petitioner gave a representation to the respondents stating that O.S.No.16 of

1998 is filed on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Ranga reddy

District at L.B. Nagar, seeking declaration and the same was dismissed vide a

Judgment and Decree dated 23.02.2006 and against that the petitioner has

preferred an appeal and in the said appeal there was an order directing the

respondents not to alienate the property. He submits that petitioner made

representations to the respondents not to grant any building permission in

respect of the suit schedule property and if any application is filed a notice

shall be given to the petitioner. He submits that he came to know some

permissions were granted in respect of the suit schedule property. He submits

that respondents should be directed to consider petitioner's representation.

3. Learned Standing Counsel Mr. V. Narsimha Goud appearing for

respondent No.2 submits that the respondents are not obligated to issue any

notice to the petitioner and even the declaration suit which is filed by the

petitioner has been dismissed and as such the respondents cannot consider the

representation of the petitioner.

4. Petitioner has filed a Suit for declaration which was dismissed and in

the appeal only a direction was granted not to alienate the property and while

granting any permission, the respondents are only concerned with the

primafacie title to the property.

5. In view of the same, this Court cannot direct the respondents to issue a

notice to the petitioner whenever an application is filed and if the petitioner

wanted any direction to the Municipality, as already a suit is pending, he can

implead the HMDA as a party-respondent to the writ petition and this Court

finds no reason to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's

representation.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 7th December , 2022 myk