P.RAJITHA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter was taken up for hearing for admission on 8/8/2024 and was argued by Mr. Mogili Anaveni, the substitute Counsel for considerable length of time.

(2.) On this Court pointing out that the petitioner who claims to be making construction on the strength of building permission/letter of approval for commencement of work issued by the 3rd respondent dtd. 17/7/2021 having purchased only plot of land under sale deed dtd. 20/11/2021 and neither a finished or unfinished building with the land appurtenant thereto and as such the petitioner is required to obtain building permission for undertaking construction and since no such permission has been obtained, the construction being made by the petitioner cannot be considered as being made in accordance with the provisions of the Telangana Municipalities Act, and the Building Rules, 2019, the learned Counsel for the petitioner arguing the matter had sought short accommodation for a day on the ground that the Counsel who filed the Writ Petition is unwell.

(3.) Upon the said request being made by the learned Counsel arguing the matter, the matter was adjourned to today i.e., on 9/8/2024. Today even before the list was taken up for hearing on admission, request was made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of time. However, this Court while declining the request made for grant time, had informed the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the matter would be proceeded with and the Counsel can appear even though hybrid mode. In the after- noon session when the matter is being called for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Thus, this Court had considered the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition for disposing of the Writ Petition.