✦ High Court of India · 15 May 2025

P.Satyam Yadav v. 1. The State of Telangana

Case Details High Court of India · 15 May 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
15 May 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,229 words

Petitior' under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances state(l in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a \A/r it, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, c e rclaring the action of the respondents more particularly the respondent No. '1 1o 6 in not considering the petitioner representation dt.16.04.2025 in tryi.3 to dismanfle the statue of Honored JatiDitha Mahatma Gandhi installed 3 yr: rrs back at ward No.1 5, near Bodrai area rf choutabefla Village, Kollapur M;r rdal, Nagarkurnool District, Telagnana S:ate is illegal, arbitrary and ,:onseq rently direct the respondent No.2 to 6 not tc dismanfle the Statue of Honored 'eLtipitha Mahatma Gandhi installed 3 years back at ward No.15, near Bodrar a rea of choutabetla Village, Kollapur Mandal Nagarkurnool District, Telagnana State. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under llection 15'l CPC praying that in the circumst.rnces stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pl,,:ased to direct the respondent No.2 to 6 not to dismantle the statue of Honcred Jatipitha Mahatma Gandhi installed 3 years back at ward No.15, near godrai area of choutabetla Village. l':orrapur Mandar, Nagarkurnool District, Ter,rgnana state, pending disposal of th: main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI p.N.ARUN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 6: AGp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respcndent Nos. 2,4 & 5: AGp FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No. 3: SRI pUTTA KRISHNA REDDy, SC FOR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 7 to 12: - MUNICIPALITY The Court made the fo[owing: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENI\IAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.1514O of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:- "to issue a Wi[ Order or Direction more panticularlg one in the nafure of Writ of Mandamus declaing the action of the respondents more partianlarlg the respondent Nos.l to 6 in not con^sideing the petittoner representation, dated 16.04.2O25 in trying to dismantle the Statue of Honored JatipitLla Mahatrna Gandhi instolled 3 Aears back qt Word No.15, near Bodrai qrea of Choutqbetla Village, Koltapur Manda[ Nagarkurnool Dstict, Telagnana State is illegat, arbitrary and consequentlg direct the respondent Nos.2 to 6 not to dismqntle tlrc Statue of Honored Jatipitha Mahqtma Gandhi installed 3 years bo,ck at Ward No.75 near Bodrai area of Choutabetla Village, Kotlopur Manda| Nagarkurnool Distnct, Telagnana State qnd to pass..."

2. Heard Sri P-N.Arun Ktrrnar, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Horne appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 6; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.2, 4 and 5 and Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3. With the consent o[ the respective parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his relief to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representation, dated i 2

16.04.2025 onlf, submitted by the petitioner. In vieu- of the same, issuance of nc,tice in respect of the unofhcial respondenr Nos.7 to 12 is dispensel with.

4. Lr:arned (:ounsel lor the petitioner is an F.x Ward l\{ember of Ward Nc.I 5, (lhoutabetla Village, Kollapur Mandal, Nag,rrkurnool District ancl during his tenure, himself and other vi11.g,ers, after collectin g the lunds, have constructed the statue 01- \4ahatma Gandhi in tlx: viliage. At the instance of the unofficial respondents, r.rten respondent No.3 was trying to removc the said statue, the pet tioner and other villagers have submittccl rL detailed represerLtation before respondent Nos.2 to 6 requesting t.hem not to remove, Lhe said statue. lrarned counsel for thc petitioner further submits that the respondent authorities, r,r.ithou. passing any orde.r on thr: sard representation, are trying to remove the said statue.

5. SrL Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Stzurding Counsel appearing for r:spondent Iy." 3, has submitted that r-es,pondent No.3-MunicipalLty is not removing the statue and r_hcy are going to shift the statuo to avoid the trafhc. Learned Sulding Counsel further submi -l; that respondent No.3 woul<l consi Cer the represenration r;r-rb6i11"6 by the petitioner in accorclance ,,Vith law and requested this Court to grant reasonabie time. 2

6. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, tJris Court, without expressing any view on the merits of the matter, deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ petition directing respondent No.3 to consider the representation, dated 76.04.2025, subrhitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate ordeis in accordance with law, wittrin a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the atrove directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if aly, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / sEcr4,oFFtcER To, 1 Prl Secretary, Home Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, The State 2 J 4 6 of Telangana. The District Collector, Nagar Kurnool District Nagarkurnool Commissioner, The Kollapur Municipality Kollapur, Nagarkurhool District The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kollapur Division, Nagarkumool District, Telangana State The Tahsildar, Kollapur Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, Telangana State The Station House Officer, Kollapur Town, Nagarkurnool District, Telangana State

7. One CC tc SRI P.I{.ARUN KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP t:()R HOME, High Court for the State,of Telanga'ra. IOUTI 9. Two CCs to GP f:()R REVENUE, High Court for the State of Teletngana.

10.One CC tc SRI PLITTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC for Municipality [OPUC]

11.Two CD Copies BGS GJP F- Vacation Go - -yir- ",::'i#( r ,0 .s\ .\, 1'r. , HIGH COURT DATED: 1410512025 ORDER WP.No.15140 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,z{ 4t /6,/s,z'ts I.fi, +&j l I I "d*i.

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments