Syed Zainulabedin vs Ahsan Ali Khan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3841 Tel

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                      AND
          THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA


                    I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022
                                   in/and
                 WRIT APPEAL No.466 of 2022

JUDGMENT:    (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)



     Heard Mr. D.Raghavender Rao, learned counsel for

the appellant.


2.   I.A.No.1 of 2022 is an application seeking leave to the

appellant to file the writ appeal; I.A.No.2 of 2022 is an

application seeking to dispense with filing of certified copy

of the order passed in the related writ petition.


3.   This appeal has been preferred against order of the

learned    Single     Judge         dated        30.06.2022     passed   in

W.P.No.27529 of 2022. Appellant was not a party to the

said proceedings. On a query by the Court as to whether

appellant would prefer to file a review petition before the

learned Single Judge since he claims to be a necessary

party, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
                                       2




impugned order may be set aside and matter may be

remanded back to the learned Single Judge.


4.   Order dated 30.06.2022 reads as under:

             "Heard    the learned counsel for the petitioners, the

     learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and
     Urban Development for respondent No.1, learned Government

Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.2, and Sri N. Praveen Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent No.3. With their consent, the writ petition itself is disposed of at the admission stage.

Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners in respect of the subject plots situated at Imam Enclave, Balapur Village and Revenue Mandal (old Saroor Nagar Mandal), the present Writ Petition is filed.

Learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, has stated that based on the complaint given by one Abha Hudin, the official respondents have only visited the site for inspection and in case the respondent authorities need to take any action, they will do so strictly in accordance with law.

Recording the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the official respondents not to interfere with the construction activity being undertaken by the petitioners over the subject lands. However, in case of any deviations from the sanctioned plan, the respondent authorities are free to take further action, strictly in accordance with law."

5. Learned Single Judge took note of the submission

made by learned Standing Counsel of Jalpally Municipality

that based on a complaint of one Abha Hudin, official

respondents had only visited the site for inspection. He

assured the Court that in case the authorities needed to

take action, they would do so strictly in accordance with

law. It was on the basis of the said statement that the writ

petition was disposed of directing the authorities not to

interfere with the construction activity of the writ

petitioners over the subject land. However, if any

deviations from the sanctioned plan are noticed by the

authorities, they would be free to take further action in

accordance with law.

6. We do not find any error or infirmity in the view

taken by the learned Single Judge.

7. We fail to understand as to how the appellant can

have any objection to such a direction of the learned Single

Judge, that too, over the patta land of the writ petitioners.

8. In view of the above, I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022 as well

as the writ appeal are dismissed.

9. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

______________________________________ SUREPALLI NANDA, J

22.07.2022 vs