M/s Santosh Dhaba Exclusive vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

[ 32301 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITIO N NO: 34072 0F 2022 l\,4/s Santosh Dhaba Exclusive, 4-1-36411 and 2, Jaya lnternational Lane, Hanuman Tekdi, Abids, Hyderabad.

Represented by its l\4anagtng Panner Sri Srtaram Sankla. ...,ET,T'ONER AND 1.

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' [r'4unicipal ^..^ nJ minliiiaiion ind"Urbdn Dbvelopment D6partment, Secreta riat' B RKR Bhavan, Hyderabad. z in" n/tri rding bireitor, Hyderabad Metropolitan water Supply and sewerage - Bo;rd Aoriinistrative offic-e euitding Khairatabad' Hyderabad - 4 e. ine oenerir Manager (EngineeringJ' HMWSSB, o and M Division No lV' Red Hills, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing the impugned notice to the Petitioner vide Lr.

No.

HMWSandSB/OandM Div.lV/Legal Noticet 2022-2023t1106 dt.

241o8t2022, under Sections 53 and 57 0f the HMWSS Act, 1989, directing the petitioner to remove the encroachments/construction made on the sewer line covered with roof and construction of kitchen on the pipeline, within a period of one week, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice. violative of Article 14 of constitution of lndia and against all settled principles of law and consequently set aside the same.

Between: IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to Suspend the operation of the impugned notice vide Lr.

No HMWS and S B/O and M Div. lV/Lega I Notice/ 2O22-2O23t1106 dl.

3t1106 dl.

2410812022, issued by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of main Writ Petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI BASA CHANAKYA counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URABAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI G.

NARENDER REDDY, SC FOR HMWS&SB The Court made the following: ORDER I , THE HON'BLE SMT.

JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION No.

34072 OF 2022 This Writ Petition is f rled seeking the following relief to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of maldamus declaring the action of the 3.d respondent in issuing the impugned notice to the petitioner vide Lr.No.

HMWS&SB/O&M Div.iv/Ifgal Notice/ 2022-202311106 dt.

24.Oa.2022 under Sections 53 and 57 of the HMWSS Act, 1989 directing the petitioner to remove the _encroachments / construction made on the sewer Line covered / with roof and construction of kitchen on the pipeline, within a period of one rveek, as illcgal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, violative of Article l4 of Constitution of India and against all settled principies of law an consequently, set aside the same and pass such other orders or reliefs as this Honble Court deems flt and proocr in the intcrcsts ofjustice." 2.

Sri Chanakya Basa, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notice dated 24.O8.2022 was issued to the petitioner directing the petitioner to remove the encroachments made on the sewer line covered with roof and construction of kitchen on the pipeline within one week otherwise they will take appropriate action against the petitioner.

He submits that the petitioner has not made any encroachment and apart frorn that before passing this order, the respondents have not issuccl any notice to the petitioner.

According to the learned counsel, the notice impugned is { $ ORDER: l 2 contrary to the principles of natural justice and on this grounC alone, the said notice has to be set aside.

3.

Sri G.

Narender Reddy, leamed Standing counsel for the 2"d respondent submits that he will come up with a counter-afhdavit.

4.

The order impugned shows that neither in the reference nor in the body, there is no reference to the show cause notice and it cal be safely concluded that no notice is issued to the petitioner before passing the impugned order , which is arbitrary and illegal.

5.

Accordingly, the notice d.ated, 24.08.2O22 is hereby set aside giving liberty to the respondents to issue a show cause notice and pass eppropriate orders in accordance with law.

T I such time, the respondents shall not interfere rvith the petitioner's possession.

6.

The Writ petition is accordingly, allowed.

No order as to costs.

The miscellaneous Applications, if anv 11 stand S closcd \ //TRUE COPY// SD/.P.PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTIOfu OFFICER To, 1 2 3 4 5 6 The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration.and-Urban Development oeoartmeht State ot telanqan'a, Secretariat, BRKR Bhavan.

Hyderabad' in6 H.itanaging Director, Hydirabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board Adriini6trative Offic-e Buildinq Khairatabad, Hyderabad - 4 ine Generat tr,4anager (Engineeringl), HMWSSB, O and tv1 Division No lV, Red Hills, Hyderabad.

One CC to Sri Basa Chanakva, Advocate IOPUC] Two CCs to GP for tvlunicipai Administration and Urban Development, High Court for the State oiTelangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Orie CC to Sri G.

Narender Reddy, SC for HTVWS&SB [OPUC] 7.

Two CD CoPies -8.-One Spare Copy Y I I l l 7. i I V \ HIGH COURT DATED:18110t2O22 T S e 1 r'lil\l 02 O r€ 2$Il ,} ORDER WP.No.34072 of 2022 ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS o Da \r 'LirD--- .* ."- to