H.R. Ravindra Kumar vs The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV — WP/16725/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 14-May-2026

CNR: HBHC010343132026

Filing Number

WP/25015/2026

Filing Date

14-May-2026

Registration No

WP/16725/2026

Registration Date

14-May-2026

Judge

T.madhavi Devi

Coram

T.madhavi Devi

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

MUNCIPAL CORPORATION OF HYDERABAD ( 25 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.H.R. Ravindra Kumar

    Adv. PARAVASTU KRISHNA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV

  2. 2.The Commissioner

  3. 3.The Dy. Commissioner

  4. 4.Pemmasani Giridhar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    T.madhavi DeviView PDF

    Case Summary: WP/16725/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Telangana set aside the GHMC's Intimation Notice dated 13.05.2026 directing the petitioner to vacate his residential premises for sealing, finding it violated natural justice principles by denying him a fair hearing opportunity. The court directed the respondent to issue a fresh notice and afford the petitioner reasonable personal hearing and opportunity to produce relevant documents before taking further action under Section 461-A of the GHMC Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-May-2026

    Admission (Municipal Admn.)

  4. 14-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/16725/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/16725/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Telangana set aside the GHMC's Intimation Notice dated 13.05.2026 directing the petitioner to vacate his residential premises for sealing, finding it violated natural justice principles by denying him a fair hearing opportunity. The court directed the respondent to issue a fresh notice and afford the petitioner reasonable personal hearing and opportunity to produce relevant documents before taking further action under Section 461-A of the GHMC Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case