Telangana High Court
Gundemoni Buchaiah vs Gurram Anantha Reddy on 27 April, 2023
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, N.Tukaramji
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT APPEAL No.489 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. P.Bhaskar, learned counsel for the
appellant and Ms. Ayesha Saba, learned counsel for
respondent No.1/writ petitioner. We have also heard
Mr. M.Raja Mukund Das, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development
Department appearing for respondents No.2, 4 and 5; and
Mr. Kishore Rao Puskuru, learned Standing Counsel
appearing for respondent No.3.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated
14.10.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing
of W.P.No.38437 of 2022 filed by respondent No.1 as the
writ petitioner.
3. Respondent No.1 had filed the related writ petition
seeking the following relief:
To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus
declaring the action of the respondent No.2 herein in not
following up with show cause notice dated: 29.08.2022
for demolition of illegal structures on public road in
spite of lapse of stipulated time in the notice, as being
illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-A
of the Constitution of India and the provisions of
Panchayat Raj Act and further declare the action of
respondent No.5 in not taking measures against
inaction of respondent No.2 notwithstanding
representation dated 03.10.2022 and pass such other
order or orders as it may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case.
4. It was complained before the learned Single Judge on
behalf of respondent No.1 that despite representation being
submitted before the authority, no follow up action was
taken pursuant to the show cause notice dated 29.08.2022
calling upon the appellant to remove the illegal structure
from the subject land. Hence, the writ petition was filed.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 submitted
before the learned Single Judge that he would take
necessary steps pursuant to the show cause notice dated
29.08.2022.
6. In view of the above, learned Single Judge disposed of
the writ petition in the following manner:
4. Recording the submission of the learned Standing
Counsel, the writ Petition is disposed of directing the
official respondents to take further action in accordance
with law, pursuant to the notice dated 29.08.2022
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
though appellant was arrayed as respondent No.6, no
notice was issued to the appellant and appellant was not
heard before issuing the impugned direction. He submits
that though the impugned direction appears to be an
innocuous one, the consequence of such direction can be
seriously adverse to the appellant. Therefore, appellant
ought to have been put on notice and heard.
8. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly agree to
the submissions made by learned counsel for the
appellant.
9. In view of the above, we set aside the order dated
14.10.2022 passed in W.P.No.38437 of 2022 and remand
the matter back to the file of learned Single Judge having
roster to rehear W.P.No.38437 of 2022 by giving an
opportunity of hearing to all the parties.
10. This disposes of the writ appeal.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________
UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ
______________________________________
N. TUKARAMJI, J
27.04.2023
vs
