Banka Suresh Babu Yadav & Anr. v. MD SALEEM
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- APMC Act, 1955 ss. 452(2), 461(2)
- APMR and UDA Act, 2016 ss. 86, 89(3)
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this Writ Petition is also disposed of, in terms of the order, dated 13.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6321 of 2024.
- Para 55. Accordingly, the confirmation order dated 02.01.2025 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the authorities. The learned Commissioner/concerned authority shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners shall co-operate for enquiry. The Commissioner/concerned authority shall pass appropriate orders, strictly in…
Judgment
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 2 ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
.... to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 in issuing the Confirmation Order under section 452(2) and 461(2) of APMC Act, 1955 and under Section 86, 89(3) of APMR and UDA Act, 2016 vide Notice No.179/1031/NLR/UC/2024 date 02.01.2025 in continuation of the earlier Provisional Orders issued under Section 452(1) and 461(2) of MC Act, 1955 and as per Section 86, 89(1 and 2), 90(1) of APMR and UDA Act, 2016 vide Notice No.179/1031/NLR/UC/2024 dated 19.12.2024 to the Petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, against the Principles of Natural Justice apart from Contravention of G.O.Ms.No.128 (Municipal Administration and Urban Development(MI) Department dated 22.05.2015 and The Andhra Pradesh Regulation and Penalization of Buildings constructed unauthorizedly and Sanctioned Plan Rules, 2015 and Consequently set aside the impugned Confirmation Order under section 452(2) and 461(2) of APMC Act, 1955 and under Section 86, 89(3) of APMR and UDA Act, 2016 vide Notice No.179/1031/NLR/UC/2024 dated 02.01.2025 in continuation of the earlier Provisional Orders issued under Section 452(1) and 461(2) of MC Act, 1955 and as per Section 86, 89(1 and 2), 90(1) of APMR and UDA Act, 2016 vide Notice No.179/1031 /NLR/UC/2024 dated 19.12.2024…...
in deviation of
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1, Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order, dated 13.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6321 of 2024 and requested to pass a similar order in this Writ Petition also. The same is not 3 disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The operative portion of the said order, reads as under:
In view of the discussion supra, the confirmation order dated
06.02.2024 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the authorities. The learned Commissioner/concerned authority shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner shall co-operate for enquiry. The Commissioner/concerned authority shall pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks and communicate the same to the petitioner. Till such time, the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive steps with regard to the subject property. The petitioner also shall not make any further constructions, till an order is passed by the authority.
In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this Writ Petition is also disposed of, in terms of the order, dated 13.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6321 of 2024.
Accordingly, the confirmation order dated 02.01.2025 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the authorities. The learned Commissioner/concerned authority shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners shall co-operate for enquiry. The Commissioner/concerned authority shall pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks and communicate the same to the petitioners. Till such time, the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive steps with regard to the subject property. The petitioners also shall not make any further constructions, till an order is passed by the authority. 4
Registry is directed to attach the copy of the order, dated 13.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6321 of 2024 to this order. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 07.01.2025 KGR
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; APMC Act, 1955 — ss. 452(2), 461(2); APMR and UDA Act, 2016 — ss. 86, 89(3).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 07 Jan 2025. The bench was V SUJATHA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.