Back
RAVI NATH TILHARI
Tadavarthy Kishore – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Sri K. Ravi, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Katta Sudhakar, learned AGP for Municipal Administration, representing respondent No.1, Sri G. Naresh Kumar, representing Sri M. Manohara Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri Kasa Jagan Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
2. With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the writ petition is being decided at the admission stage without calling for counter affidavit.
3. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:
"...to declare the Notices bearing No.871/1073/VMC//UC/2022, dtd. 11/8/2022 and 871/1073/VMC/UC/2022, dtd. 23/8/2022 issued by the 2nd respondent wholly illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that the petitioners are not liable for demolition of the building constructed by the petitioners and pass such other order or orders....."
4. Sri K. Ravi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that the impugned order dtd. 11/8/2022 has been passed without application o
A satisfactory explanation offered by the owner of an unauthorized construction must be considered before proceeding with demolition, and demolition should not be resorted to if the deviations are mi....
Availability of alternate remedy under Section 347B of the DMC Act and the principles for entertaining a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
