N Ramu v. 1. The State of Telangana

B. M/s. lndo Qqtar Projects Pvt Ltd.. Rep.by its Managing Eirector Mr. Giri Polisettv Reqd. Offlce at Sri Sai Soudhd, Vijay Co-Operative House Building Spciety, MLA and MP s Colony, Road No.10C, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500045. ..RESPONDENTS Pgtitipn under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circum$tances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in --------7 the nature of a Writ of Mandamus by declaring the actron of the Respondent authorities more particularly the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 in issuing the Layout permissions vide Draft Layout Technical Pattern Lr. ROC, No.31 47iAmmapaleml2021 10596, dt.04.04.2022 aod Tentative Layout Plan vide TLP No 267?25/LP/GPt2Q245A00q212023, dt,25 04.2023 situated at Amrylapalerp Revenue Village of KoniUerla Man{al, Khammam District in fayour of the Respondent Ne.B Qompany without proper gnquily and also not tahing action on the illegal ca0struclions in the said tentative Layouts and SUOA Filg No 425891 I LP i GP l2Q2A52 r QO2l t2O?4. d1.11.08.2024 dqsprte representotions madq by the Petitioner dt.24,Q3 2025, 11 03.20?5, 03.02.2025. 1Q.022025, '!4 02 ?025 as illegal, erbitrary and vi0lation of the prinoiples of natural jusqiqe an{ rights guaranleed under Article 14,19, 21 and 3QQ'A ql the Qonqtitutiqn af lndia and consequently direct the BAspqodenl Nos.4 and 5 to coosider lhe tqpresentations dt.24.03.20?5, 11 93.20?5, 09,02.eOe5, 10.Q2,20?5. 14.Q2.?025 q, the Fetitioner and al_so cgnduct prepe[ enquiry enO cancel the said illegal t.aygul Permission$ vide Draft lgyout Tgch4igal pgttern t-r. RQQ Nq 3l471Ammapale1n/2021iQ[96, dt.O4 04.2022 and Tentfltive Layqg! Plan vrde TLP No. 267225tLP|GP|2024AAQQQ2|?Q23, dr25.Q4.2Q23 pertaining to the residentiat Layouts under the name and style of QHABMASTHALI KSHEI RA and alEo nql t9 allow tlre illegal Layout gppliqBtion of the Reqpondenl No.B yide SUDA File No. 425801 t LP / GP 1 202452 t 0Q25 1 2Q24, dt 11 OQ 2024 sitsqted al Amnrapqtem RevenqB Village q{ Konijerle Mar-rdal, Khammam Diatricl and also to tAhF appropriate Aclion o0 the illegal constructions in the said Layqut6. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 -"__:-'____-_--lll-!!'- Pgtition under Segtion 151 qPC praying that in the circumstanpes stated in lhe affidavit filgd in auppgJ! of lhe petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Rggpondqnt Nos 4 and 5 to conduat through enquiry on the illegal constructionS and Tentative Layoul Permisgions vide Drafl Layout Technical Paltern Lr. RpC No.31 7lAmmapalem/2Q2110596, d1.04.04.2022 and Tentative Layout Plan vide TLP No 267225lLPlGPt2O2452lOOO2t2O23, dt 25.04.2023 issued in favour of the Respondent No.B and Layout application of the Rqspondent No.B Company vide SUDA File Nq. 425801 I LP I GP t 202452 I 0025 I 20?4, d1.11.08 2024 forthwith pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. I !:: { t I I lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under section 15.1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent Nqs.4 and 5 not to allow the illegal Layout application of the Regpondent Ng B vide SUDA File No. 425801 / LP / GP l 2Q?452 I 9025 1 2024, dt11.O82024 sitqqted al Ammapalem Revenue'Vilhge of Konrjerla Manda!, Khammam pislrict [y considering the representations dt,24.03 2025, 11.032925' $ q2.1Q25, 1A,02.?Q25, 14 0?.202,5 9f the fptitionqr farthwilh pendiog diqpospl 9f the abqve Writ Petilion. Counsql for the Pqtitioner; SFI NAVEEN KUMAR V gqqnsgl for the Reqpondent Nos.1 and 3: GF FOR MCPL APMN UBPAN DEV Coqnsql for the Reppondant Nps.2,4 qnd Q: $P EqR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI P. KRISHAN REDDY, Sc FOR SUDA Counse! for lhe Reqpondont {o.7: Gq FOR IRRIQATION The Cqurt rnade thF folloqinqi oBqER HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.10418 OF 2025 ORDER:(ORAI) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication as the authorities have sanctioned layout rn favour of respondent No.8, as such, seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said layout. To that effect, learned counsel made an endorsement on the case bundle. Permission is accorded and the writ petition is, accordingly, disrnissed as withdrawn granting liberty as sought for. No order as to costs. As a seqr,rel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. "'i1iErs$::E:",i--, //TRUE COPY// to Sri Navee n Kumar V, A al Adm t HYde rt for the State of Telangana' at ion, High Cou nue, High Court for the State of Telangana' at dvocate [OP inistration Urban DeveloPment, High Court rabad Iourl One CC 1 Two CCs to GP for MuniciP 2 ana, a for the State of Telang lrrigat to The GP for 3 lwo u\, Hyderab adlourl 4Tw oCCto The GP fo r Reve Hyd CC toSri P One Two CD Copies erabad E 6 Krishna ReddY, SC[OPUC] To, TJ L]S -fttc, t F I k F I t t: t I : I t t'. HIGH COURT DATED:0710412025 ORDER WP.No.10418 of 2025 HE ST4 + J N I I 2 3 t'lAY 2[25 a C) .{= \ atE5p,-r11'PLt DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS S^c +0\eb-{