Suddala Mallava v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not considering the regularization application G2t3503t3212016/KNR Dt.01{3-2016 and subsequent representation submitted on 24.04.2017 by the petitioner herein, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 at:d 21 and 30O A of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the 3rd respondent consider the appl'rcation of the petitioner for regularization. l.A. NO:1 oF 20 17(WP MP. NO: 21529 0F 20171 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to consider the regurarization apprication G2t3so3t 3212016/KNR Dt.1_03_20.r6 and subsequent representation submitted on 24.04.2017 submitted by the petitioner herein, pending disposar of the above writ petition and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper. W.P.No.1 7671 oF 2017 Between: $,;,?8in"",n", Wo Shankar, Aged 45, years, Husnapur, Karimnagar, Karimnagar l I AND

1. The State of Telangana, rep. by its principal Secre Ad;i"[i;,iil;Hp"?,i"ntl secretariat, nvo"r"or]lv

2. The District Collector, Karimnagar., _ 3. The Karimnaqar Municir Karimnagar, rrdrn.g"?ti:l#f ration' Rep'bv its commissioner, ...PETITIONER (Municipar ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issue a writ, order or direction, especialy one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the 3rd respondent in not considering the regurarization apprication c2r3157t32t2016/KNR Dt.o1-03-2016 and subsequent representation submitted on 24'04.2017 by the petitioner herein, as iregar, arbitrary and viorative of Articres 't q and zl and 300 A of the constitution of rndia and consequenry direct the 3rd respondent consider the apprication of the petitioner for regurarization. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 215EO OF 20171 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 consider the regularization application G2131571 32I2016/KNR and subsequent representation submitted on 24.04.2017 submitted by the petitioner herein, pending disposai of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI E.V.V.S.RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents No.l&2 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN-URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI K.PRABHAKAR RAO, SC FOR MC The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER ; t i THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AI.OK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION Nos. 17635 AND 1767t oF 2017 COMMO NOR DER: (Per the Hon 'ble Si Justice J.Sreeniuas Rao) Writ Petition No.1763.5 of 2Ol7 is filed seeking the following relieI ".....t,: issue a Writ. order or direcdon, especiaJly one . rn the narure of wrir of rrlu"a"_r" JJri** i#J.j.,,., ,, the 3rd respondent in n, ,ppri"ution-"Ci);;;.'i:;/1.i'6}",ll,"JT,,t:;:1fi ,;,i:: subsequent representarion. submitted on- Zi-"Oe-"ZO I Z Ay the petitiont:r herein. as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Arlicles 14. 2 t and soo n orlhe c.""titrl,il"".i i""0," ."0 consequenttJ/, direct the 3.d r""po;;;;;'i".'.1"r*il". *" application of the petitione. f.. ,"d;t;;;# #J;;"". . .- Writ Petition No.17671 of 20lZ is filed seeking the following 2 relief ,,... ... to issue a Wri1, 6rd6,1 or direction especially one in the naturc ot Writ of Manaamus;;,#;ai;.;oion the 3rd respondenL in n appr ica ri on E r' ii, i, i ri'r") o,?ii',$ ;:, H,, H ;:tfif ,f : ;:I;:H:i#XT:i,',il:i submirted'on-i i oi-"ro'i, o, ,n" ic, zt u,,i-:,6'ri'-:f'abitrarv and violative orArricles th,e constitution of India and consequenuy, direct the j:;..';o.::ili#.i1.:.*TX;*:,Tj "nor"i-.,1ii."3i,,;J;:; I i I I I I i i I l 2

3. The relief sought by the petitioner in both the writ petitions is one and the same and therefore' both the cases are disposed of by this common order with the consent of the respective parties'

4. No representation on behalf of petitioner' 5. Heard Sri E'Venkata Reddy' leamed Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban 2 and Sri appearing on behalf of resPondent K.Prabhakar Rao, Iearned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No 3, in both the writ petitions' Nos.l and DeveloPment Department

6. Brief facts of case:

6.1 The grievance of the petitioners is that they are owners of an extent of 60 square Yards each' situated in SY'No'593 at HasnaPur Village, Karimnagar District and the same were allotted by the revenue authorities under Patta No'B1/5552/08' dated since then they have been in possession and 19.01.2OO9 and the houses therein said proPertY bY constructtng enjoyment of the and respondent No'3 allotted house number' The petitioners are paylng electricity bills to the concerned authorities and they have submitted application Nos'G2/3503/32l2016/KNR and G2l3157 l32l2o16i KNR dated 01'03'2016 before respondent No'3 seeking regularization of the construction made by them pr'rrsuant t J to the G.O.Ms.No.152, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (l\4 l) Department, dated 02.1L.2OlS issued by responden t No. 1 by paying requisi te amount. The petitioners further submitted another representatio n on 24.O4.2017. In spite of repeated requests made by the petitioners, respondent No.3 has not taken any steps to consider the application submitted by them without any reasons. At this juncture, the petitioners have approached this tlo, - and hled these writ petitions.

7. Respondents have not filed counter affidavit-

8. l,earned counsel for respondent No.3 submitted that respondent No.3 will consider the applications submitted by the petitioners dated 24.O4.2OI7 and requested this Court to grant reasonable time.

9. In view of the above said submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel, without going into the merits of the case, respondent No.3 is directed to consider the application submit[ed by the petitioners dated 24.O4.2017 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if not already disposed of.

10. Accordingly, both the Writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications' if any' shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// sD/-A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR a/ SECTION OFFICER

1. The Prirrcipal Secretary (Municipal Administration Department) State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Karimnagar., - 3. The Commissioner, Karimnagar Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar, 4. One CC to SRI E.V.V.S.RAVI KUMAR, Advocate. [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN-URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

6. One CC to SRI K.PRABHAKAR RAO, SCrcR MC. [OPUCI 7. Two CD Copies. BSK LS Y HIGH COURT DATED:0710112025 i:iE SI,. /6. o o Z 4 Jlil ,fiZ5 1 S:. COMMON ORDER WP.No.17635 & 11G71 of 2011 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS