Telangana High Court
Martha Swapna vs The State Of Telangana on 28 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.509 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. P.V.S.K.Chakravarthy, learned counsel for
the appellant; Mr. T.Srikanth Reddy, learned Government
Pleader for Revenue representing respondents No.1, 2
and 5; Mr. M.Raja Mukund Das, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural
Development Department appearing for respondents No.3
and 4; Mr. P.Kishore Rao, learned Standing Counsel for
respondent No.6; Mr. Md. Abdul Mateen Qureshi, learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing
respondents No.7 and 8; and Mr. B.Mahender Reddy,
learned counsel for respondent No.9.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated
11.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.2
of 2022 in W.P.No.24049 of 2022 filed by the appellant as
the writ petitioner.
3. Appellant had filed the related writ petition seeking a
direction to the official respondents to stop the alleged
illegal construction by respondent No.9 in respect of house
site bearing House No.3-1-230 (new) and 3-1-157 (old) in
the year 1992 and 3-1-109 (old) in the year 1987 situated
at Vidyanagar Colony, Chunchupally Mandal, Bhadradri
Kothagudem District.
4. An interlocutory application has been filed, being
I.A.No.1 of 2022, for stay. Learned Single Judge vide the
order dated 18.07.2022 passed the following order:
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent No.9 seeks time for filing counter.
Post on 04.08.2022.
A perusal of the counter filed by the learned
Standing Counsel shows that the respondent No.9 is
making construction without having any building
permission. That in spite of the directions issued by the
official respondents for stopping the construction, the
respondent No.9 is going ahead with the construction.
Having regard to the above, the respondent No.9
is restrained from making any further construction.
Pending further orders, the Gram Panchayat is
directed to seal the building in question and file a report
along with the photographs by the next date of hearing.
5. It appears, respondent No.9 had filed an interlocutory
application for modification of the aforesaid order which
was registered as I.A.No.2 of 2022. Learned Single Judge
passed the following order on 11.04.2023:
Interim order dated 18.07.2022 is modified by
allowing the petitioner herein to complete the internal
works and she shall not raise any constructions over the
subject property and whatever constructions carried out
by him on the subject property is subject to outcome of
the writ petition.
Post on 27.06.2023
6. From the above, we find that learned Single Judge
has modified the earlier order dated 18.07.2022 by
allowing respondent No.9 to complete the internal works,
but restraining her from making any further constructions
over the subject property. That apart, learned Single
Judge has made it clear that whatever constructions have
been carried out by respondent No.9 on the subject land
would be subject to the outcome of the writ petition. The
writ petition has been posted for further consideration on
27.06.2023.
7. Since the order dated 11.04.2023 is an interlocutory
order making the same subject to outcome of the writ
petition while fixing the writ petition for further
consideration on 27.06.2023, we are not inclined to
entertain the writ appeal and start a parallel proceeding. It
is open for the parties to make their respective
submissions before the learned Single Judge.
8. Subject to the above, writ appeal is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________
UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ
______________________________________
N. TUKARAMJI, J
28.04.2023
vs
