Telangana High Court
M/S. Satish Mutually Aided Coop Housing ... vs State Of Telangana on 9 February, 2021
Author: A.Abhishek Reddy
Bench: A.Abhishek Reddy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY
W.P.No.13434 OF 2020
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the impugned rejection letters issued by the respondent No.3 vide File Nos.3144/W1/2020/0039, 3144/W1/2020/0034, 3144/W1/ 2020/0017, 3144/W1/2019/0288, 3144/W1/2019/0286 and 3144/W1/2019/0285, dated 13.03.2020 respectively, as illegal and arbitrary.
According to the petitioners, petitioner No.1 is the registered society and petitioner Nos.2 to 7 are its members. Petitioner Nos.2 to 7 are having right, title and possession over their respective plots in the layout comprised in Survey Nos.246 to 269 of Bowrampet Village. They got their plots regularized and LRS proceedings were also issued in their favour. The petitioners approached the respondent No.3 and filed applications for building permission by paying the necessary fee. However, respondent No.3 vide the impugned rejection letters has rejected their applications on the ground that several cases are pending in the Courts against the subject lands. Hence, this writ petition.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.2, and the learned Standing Counsel for Municipality for respondent No.3. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.
A perusal of the impugned rejection letters does not disclose as to on what basis respondent No.3 has come to the conclusion that several cases are pending against the subject lands, and 2 whether the documents relied on by respondent No.3 were furnished to the petitioners so as to enable them to put forth their cases or submit their explanations. It is also not clear as to what was the endorsement made by the Collector & District Magistrate vide letter dated 27.07.2019.
Having regard to the same, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that ends of justice would be met if the impugned rejection letters are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the authority concerned to decide the same afresh.
Accordingly, the impugned rejection letters are set aside and the matter is remanded back to respondent No.3 to decide the same afresh, duly putting the petitioners on notice and furnishing the documents relied upon by him. Before passing the orders, respondent No.3 shall give an opportunity to the petitioners to submit their explanations and also afford them an opportunity of hearing. If respondent No.3 comes to a conclusion to reject the building permission applications of the petitioners, he shall mention the specific reasons in the rejection orders. A copy of the orders that may be passed by respondent No.3 shall be communicated to the petitioners.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ A.ABHISHEK REDDY, J Date: 09.02.2021 va