Andhra Pradesh High Court · 2004
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Smt. Rukmini Bai, W/o. Moolchand, R/o. 3-4-672, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad.
2. Mir Khursheed Ali Khan, S/o. Mir Humayum Ali Khan, R/o. 16-10-112, Malakpet, Hyderabad. AND ..... PETITIONERS
1 Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 Engineer-in-Chief , R & B Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 4 Vice Chairman, HUDA, Paigah Palace, Police Line, Secunderabad. 5 Commissioner of police, Chatta Bazar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate Writ or Writs restraining the Respondents No. 1 to 5 and their subordinates from interfering with the peaceful possession and demolition of the petitioners premises bearing No. 3-4-672, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad & H.No. 3-4- 676, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad, either in part or whole and further direct the Respondents No. 1 & 2 to follow the Mandatory provisions of HMC Act and land Acquisition Act. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.K.RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.C.R.PRATAP REDDY (SC MCH, CIRCLE 3- 5) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
WRIT PETITION NO: 826 of 1998
ORDER:
Operative part
This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to follow the mandatory provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and Land Acquisition Act before the alleged action of demolition of premises belonging to the petitioners 1 and 2 bearing H.Nos.3-4-672 and 3-4-676, Narayanguda, Hyderabad, either in part or whole. It is submitted that the petitioners are the owners and possessors of the houses and their main grievance is that their premises are being sought to be acquired by the respondents for the purpose of erecting a fly over bridge without following due process of law as contemplated under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and the Land Acquisition Act, which is illegal and arbitrary. While entertaining this writ petition, this Court, on 12.1.1998, granted stay of demolition of the premises of the petitioners until further orders. The respondents have not filed counter. In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to demolish the premises of the petitioners without following the due process of law in terms of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and the Land Acquisition Act. No costs. 9-12-2004 Gsn. To 1 The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 Engineer- in -Chief , R & B Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 4 Vice Chairman, HUDA, Paigah Palace, Police Line, Secunderabad. 5 The Commissioner of police, Chatta Bazar, Hyderabad. 6 Two C.D.Copies.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act; Land Acquisition Act.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 09 Dec 2004. The bench was GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA.
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.