M/S. Dayanand Vegetable Market vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1180 Tel

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

                              AND

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


               WRIT APPEAL No.306 of 2023


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


      Heard Mr. K.Ramakrishna, learned counsel for the

appellant and Mr. Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned

Standing     Counsel,     Greater     Hyderabad       Municipal

Corporation (GHMC) for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2. This intra-court appeal is directed against the

interim order dated 27.02.2023 passed by the learned

Single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.5525 of 2023.

3. Appellant claims to be the owner of the open

land bearing No.17-2-581/A/3 wherein a vegetable market

is functioning. Alleging that the landlord had not paid the

due municipal taxes till the year ending 2022-23, notices

under Section 276 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal 2 HCJ & NTRJ W.A.No.306 of 2023

Corporation Act, 1955 have been issued to the tenants on

10.02.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

in respect of municipal taxes for the said land, appellant

has already filed a writ petition before this Court being Writ

Petition No.16876 of 2022 wherein demand notice issued

by the GHMC has been impugned. In the aforesaid case

which is pending, an interim order was passed on

01.04.2022 to the effect that respondent authorities i.e.,

GHMC shall not take any coercive steps against the

appellant. He submits that the appellant is willing to pay

the legitimate taxes, but for that reason demand notices

ought not to have been issued to the occupiers.

5. Learned Single Judge vide the order dated

27.02.2023 granted stay of the impugned notices subject to

appellant depositing 50% of the demanded amount within

eight weeks, thereafter fixing the matter for further

consideration on 10.04.2023.

                                 3                       HCJ & NTRJ
                                                  W.A.No.306 of 2023




     6.    We    are   unable       to   accept      the   contention

advanced    by   learned   counsel       for   the    appellant   for

entertaining the writ appeal.

7. Admittedly, appellant has not paid the due

municipal taxes. Insofar Writ Petition No.16876 of 2022 is

concerned, there is no stay on the demand raised. All that

learned Single Judge has said is that no coercive action

should be taken against the appellant. That order was also

upto 07.04.2022. There is nothing on record to show that

it has been extended beyond 07.04.2022. In any view of

the matter, learned Single Judge has exercised his

discretion and granted stay subject to deposit of 50% of the

demanded amount within eight weeks.

8. The aforesaid order being an interlocutory one

with further hearing fixed on 10.04.2023, we are not

inclined to entertain the writ appeal.

9. Further, the occupiers have not expressed any

grievance before us.

                                   4                    HCJ & NTRJ
                                                 W.A.No.306 of 2023

10. Writ Appeal is therefore without any merit and

is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order

as to costs.

11. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications

pending, if any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.

_______________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

_______________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 13.03.2023 KL