William Fredrick Durr v. The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Town
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed a
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 32726 OF 2010 Between: William Fredrick Durr, S/o. Mr. William Theodore Durr, aged 52 years, Occ: Buiiness, Fl/o. Plot No.37, Block No. 8, 5-09-240/45, Shaili Gardenia, JJ Nagar Post, Hyderabad - 87 AND The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Town Planning S-ection, Alwal Circle No. 16, Hyderabad ...PETITIONER
RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 ol lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the notice No. 30/TPS/CR-16/N2/Crime/1 0, dt. 20.12.2010 as arbitrary, illegal, and unlust l.A. NO: 1 OF 2010 (WPMP. NO: 41589 O F 2010) Petition under section 151 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 not to carry out any demolition of the compound wall in pursuance of Notice No. 3O/TPS/CR-16/N2/CRllME/'l0 dated 20th December 2010 COUNSEI fOr thE PCtitiONET: SRI MD. AAMERUDDIN REP. FOR SRI MAHMOOD ALI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K. RAVI MAHENDER (SC FOR GHMC) The Court made the following: OROER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.32726 OF 2OIO
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed to declare the noticS' No.30/TPS/CR-16/N2/Crime/ 10, dated 2O-t2-20 10 as illegat and arbitrary.
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.Md.Aameruddin, representing Mr.Mahmood F,li, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that ht-' intends to withdraw the present Writ Petition with liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition in the event of any subsequent grievanr:e arises.
3. Permission is accorded as prayed for
Operative part
4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed a; withdrawn There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if iury, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// A SIlINIVASA REDDY SISTA.NT REGISTRAR SD/. T S=CTION OFFICER T o
One CC to SRI IVAHIMOOD ALt, Advocate IOpUCt 2. One CC to SRt K RAVT tvAHENDER (SC FOR G*N/C) [OF,LrC] 3. Two CD Copies BN GJP HIGH COURT DATED:2610912025 a" ORDER WP.No.32726 of 2010 t[ s t',1 ( oB 3 I t rtttv 15 z () t o Esr,, I : H9',: + i iL. DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS 6
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed a
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
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.