SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(AP) 184

V.SIVARAMAN NAIR, M.N.RAO
Aditya Constructions, reptd. , by its Partner, sri Chiranjilal Vyas – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Housing, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Dept, Hyderabad – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS writ petition comes before us on a reference by a learned single Judge, since it was urged that Regulation 3 of Bhagyanagar Multistoreyed Building regulations was unconstitutional, and according to the learned single Judge that question was better decided by a Division Bench.

( 2 ) PETITIONER filed an application dated 14-8-1981 for permission to construct 1 + 13 storeyed building, to the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. It contended that its application should have been dealt with under Municipal corporation Bye-laws, 1972 and not under Bhagyanagar Urban Development authority Multistoreyed Building Regulations, 1981 which came into force on 5-9-1981. It also contended that the Municipal Corporation Building Bye-laws enacted by G. O. Ms. No. 905 dated 7-8-1981 which came into force on 5-9-1981 were not applicable to its application.

( 3 ) THE learned single Judge heard the matter along with W. P. No. 11818/86 and passed a common order referring both the writ petitions to a Division bench. The former - W. P. No. 11818/86 - was disposed of because it was rendered infructuous as the petitioner therein constructed the building in accordance with the sanction accorded by t


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top