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

2021 Supreme(Telangana) 391

A. ABHISHEK REDDY
B. Chandra Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: B. Mayur Reddy.

ORDER :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No. 1 and Sri N. Praveen Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel for Municipality for respondent No. 2. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

2. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners being aggrieved by the notice dated 30.12.2020 issued by respondent No. 2 directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorized sheds within three days from the date of receipt of the said notice.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that without issuing any show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, respondent No. 2-the Commissioner, Vikarabad Municipality, has straightaway issued the impugned notice directing the petitioners to remove the structures, which is contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 and principles of natural justice, and therefore, prays to set aside the impugned notice.

4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2-Municipality states that the petitioners may be directed to submit their explanation to the i

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