Hari Priya vs The State Of Telangana on 7 August, 2026

    0
    14
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Telangana High Court

    Hari Priya vs The State Of Telangana on 7 August, 2026

    Author: B. Vijaysen Reddy

    Bench: B. Vijaysen Reddy

            IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                            AT HYDERABAD
                  HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
                         WRIT PETITION No.26295 OF 2026
    
                                  DATE: 07.08.2026
    Between:
    
    Hari Priya
                                                                          ...Petitioner
                                            AND
    The State of Telangana,
    Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
    Municipal Administration and Urban Development,
    Secretariat, Hyderabad,
    and four others
                                                                     ...Respondents
    
    ORDER :

    (ORAL)

    Heard Mr. Y. Shreyas Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner;

    SPONSORED

    and Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Cyberabad

    Municipal Corporation, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4, and perused

    the material on record.

    2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned

    speaking order is illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice. In

    fact, the petitioner was issued hearing notice/intimation dated

    04.08.2026, scheduling the hearing on 05.08.2026. However,

    surprisingly, the impugned speaking order was also passed on

    04.08.2026 itself even before conducting proper enquiry.
    2

    BVR,J
    WP.No.26295_2026

    3. A copy of the hearing notice/intimation dated 04.08.2026 is

    placed on record, from which it is apparent that the speaking order was

    passed prior to conducting proper enquiry. Thus, the speaking order is in

    violation of the principles of natural justice.

    4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the

    impugned speaking order dated 04.08.2026 passed by respondent No.4.

    Respondent No.4 is directed to conduct an enquiry pursuant to the

    hearing notice/intimation dated 04.08.2026 and pass appropriate orders,

    in accordance with law, by considering the reply, if any, filed by the

    petitioner and by affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the

    petitioner and respondent No.5. As this order is passed without entering

    into the merits of the case, notice to respondent No.5 is dispensed with.

    However, if respondent No.5 is in any way aggrieved by this order, she is

    at liberty to approach this Court seeking modification of this order. There

    shall be 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)
    vv



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here