High Court · 2025

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) [ 3383 I TUESDAY, THE TWENW SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE LA)ffiI NARAYANA ALISHETTY AND [T Between: Aarya Vysya Sangham, Vasavi Gardens Metpaily, Rep. by its secretary, I:,if ,ri:lb1ili,:[:n[?*3:l'i,e3:i,::m,:?]ie"I6"I'diin"e=."s,=nvo AND

1. The State of Administration a Hyderabad. 2. The Metpally Commissionei. Rep.by it: Principal Secretary, Municipal Department, Telangana Secretariat, Municipality, Metpally, Jagityal District, Rep.by its ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing show cause Notice No.G/243 t2016, dt.2g. 11.2016 to demotish the structures in premises No. 1-3-304tA1, as iilegar, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequenfly set aside the same. O:1 I 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 suspend the Show Cause Notice No.G124312016, dt.29.11.2116 by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI POLISETTY RADHA KRISHNA Counsel forthe Respondent No.l: GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MCPL WRIT P Between: N NO:43377 2016 Sambari Prabhakar, S/o. Chinnaiah, aged about Sl years, Occ Business, Rl/o. H.No 1-3-2 to 4, Main Road, Metpally, Jagityal Distri6t. .PETITIONER 1 The State of Telangana, Rep.by its principal Secretarv. Municioal Administration and Urban Development Departmdnt, Telangani secretariat, Hyderabad. Ih" Metpally Municipality, Metpally, Jagityal District, Rep.by its Commissioner. 2 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing show cause Notice No.G/24312016, dt. 29.11.2016 to demolish the structures in premises No. 1-3-2 to 1-3-4, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the same. NO F 201 Petition under Section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the Show Cause Notice No.G/243l2016, dt.29.11.2016 by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition. Gounsel forthe Petitioner: SRI POLISEITY RADHA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No.l: GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MCPL CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1126OF 2021 Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondent for willful, deliberate and intentional violation of the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in WPMP.No.53760|2O16 in WP.No.43562/2016, dt.16t12t2016. Between: Aarya Vysya Sangham, Vasavi Gardens Metpally, Rep. by its Secretary, Thota Pentaiah, Kashaiah, aged about. 59 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. H.No. 1-3-304/41 . Market Area, Metpally, Jagityal District. AND Sri S. Samaiah, S/o. Not known, Commissioner, Metpally Municipality, Metpally, Karimnagar District. ...PETITIONER ...CONTEMNORS Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI POLISETTY RADHA KRTSHNA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MCPL I Petition under Sections 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondent for their willful, deliberate and intentional violation of the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in WPMP.No.53532|2O16 in WP.No.4337712O16, dt.1611212016. Between: Sambari Prabhakar, S/o. Chinnaiah, Aged about. 63 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 1-3-2 to 4, Main Road, Metpally, Karimnagar District. AND Sri S. Samaiah, S/o. Not known, Commissioner, Metpally Municipality, [Vletpally, Jag ityal, Karimnagar District. ...PETITIONER ...CONTEMNORS Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI POLISETTY RADHA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MCPL The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY AND 1 COMMON ORDER: w.P.No.43562 of 2ot6 is filed by the petitioner /r,rya vysya Sangham, challenging the show-cause notice dated 2g.ll.2oL6, issued by respondent No.2 and. this court uide order dated 16-12.2076, suspended the said Show-cause notice and alleging violation of the said orders, petitioner filed c.c.No. Lt26 of 2o2L. 2- w.P.No.433z7 of 2016 is filed by the petitioner/sambari Prabhakar, challenging the show-cause notice dated 2g.LL.2oL6, issued by respondent No.2 and this court uid.e order dated 76-72.2016, suspended the said Show-cause notice and alleging violation of the said orders, petitioner filed c.c.No.1lo9 of 2o2L. t t

3. Heard sri polisetty Radha Krishna, learned coirnsel for petitioner and sri Putta Krishna Red.dy, learned standing counsel for Municipalities, in both the writ petitions. , { 4- l,earned counser for the petitioner as well as learned standing Counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that respondent No-2/Municipality passed a resolution uide cr.No.535 dated 2

28.09.2024, for construction of C.C drain from Sambari Prabhakar House to main drain at Market in Metpally Municipality, without affecting the petitioner's house and the work has been completed by March, 2025. It is further represented that respondent No.2/Municipality neither demolished the compound wall nor the slab laid on the drainage by the petitioner, therefore, the cause in the writ petitions does not survive and the writ petitions as well as contempt cases may be closed.

6. Recording the above said submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2/Municipality, both the writ petitions are closed as cause does not survive. In view of closure of writ petitions, Contempt Cases are also closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPYII sD/-A.V.S. DEPUTY REGI6 SECTION OFFTCER

1. One CC to SRI POLISETTY RADHA KR|SHNA, Advocate IOPUCI 2. One CC to SRt PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MCPL IOPUC] t . Two CD Copies ,}f"ffi;"tif"?[r$,.S:StdrflN & ,RBAN DEV, Hish court rorthe state 4 BSR LS HIGH COURT 26t08t2025 lh* COMMON ORDER W.P.Nos.435G2 & 4337T of 2016 AND C.C.No.1 126 & 1109 of 2021 u ( t \ s -i ttc c f2.,, I? il0u ?m ] SPATC r.t'io { a. I CLOSING OTH THE W.P's & C.C,s, WITHOUT COSTS \t ){ \