V Hemavathi vs The State Of Telangana on 7 August, 2026

    0
    19
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Telangana High Court

    V Hemavathi vs The State Of Telangana on 7 August, 2026

    Author: B. Vijaysen Reddy

    Bench: B. Vijaysen Reddy

         HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                     AT HYDERABAD
    
     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
    
                  WRIT PETITON No.24042 OF 2026
    
                            DATE: 07-08-2026
    
    Between:
    Mrs. V. Hemavathi
                                                      ... Petitioner
                                   AND
    
    The State of Telangana
    Rep. By its Principal Secretary,
    Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department,
    Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others.
                                                  ... Respondents
    
    ORDER :

    (ORAL)

    Heard Mr. M. Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the

    SPONSORED

    petitioner and Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned standing counsel for

    Municipalities, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

    2. Learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 placed

    on record written instructions and submitted that respondent No.4

    voluntary agreed to surrender portion of his property bearing

    H.No.4-47, Wanaparthy Road, Pebbair Village and Mandal,

    Wanaparthy District, which is being affected in the road widening
    2
    BVR,J
    W.P. No.24042 of 2026

    and requested the Municipality to demolish a part of his building

    which is coming within eighty (80) feet wide road.

    3. Learned standing counsel submitted that it was decided to

    widen the road from Pebbair leading to Wanaparthy to 100′ feet for

    public purpose by Municipal Council resolution No.602 dated

    05.11.2022. However, at present width of the road has been

    approved to widen to only eighty (80) feet. The property of

    respondent No.4 which is being affected in the proposed road

    widening will be demolished within one (1) week.

    4. Recording the aforesaid submissions of learned standing

    counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3, the writ petition is disposed of.

    5. This Court by order dated 24.07.2026 issued notice to

    respondent No.4 and permitted the petitioner to take out personal

    notice to respondent No.4. However, notice has not been served on

    him. As this order is passed without going into the merits, notice to

    respondent No.4 is dispensed with. If respondent No.4 is in any way
    3
    BVR,J
    W.P. No.24042 of 2026

    aggrieved by this order, he is at liberty to approach this Court

    seeking modification of this order. No order as to costs.

    As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,

    pending in the writ petition stand closed.

    ______________________
    B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J

    August 07, 2026
    Note: Issue CC today (BO) MS



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here