The High Court · 2025

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 an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of [\,4andamus, declaring the lmpugned Order passed by the 2nd respondent in Notice No.G1i UC/006 lKpRl2OZ4-25, dt.1611212024 whereby drrecting the petitioner to remove the alleged unauthorized construction of the petitioner at house property bearing H.No.9-1'l 7, situated at padmavathinagar, Khanapur Village and I\,4andal, Nirmal District on the ground of encroaching 52.6 Sq. Yards of 100 Feet wide Road leading from Nirmal to Khanapur p.S on the basis of alleged survey conducted by Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Nirmal District without conducting any enquiry by giving opportunity to the Petitioner pursuant the Explanation submitted by the petitioner, dt.2sl11l2o24 as illegal, arbitrary, unco nstitutiona l, contrary to the provisions of Municipalities Act and against the principles of natural justice and consequently by setting aside the lmpugned Order of the 2nd respondent dt.16112t2024 direct th; 2nd respondent not to demolish the petitioner s house property bearing H.No.9-i.1 7, situated at Padmavathinagar, Khanapur Village and lVlandai, Nirmal District without following due process of law by giving opportunity of hearing and considering the case on merits. 7 , lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under sectron 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ine Higrr court may be pleaseJ to direct the 2nd respondent not to initiate any stepi incruding dlmoriiion of the p.etitioner s house property bearing H.No.9-r 17, situated ai padmavathinagar, Khanapui-Village & Mandar, Nirmar District pursuant to the rmpugned ordei in Notice No.G1/UCt006tKpRl2o24-2s, dt.16112J2024, pending dispos"at of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C. HARI PREETH counsel for the Respondent No.1: cp FoR MUNlcrpAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDy, SC FOR KHANAPUR MUNICIPALITY The Court made the following: ORDER I I I HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PEIITION No.142 of 2O2S ORDER: Heard Sri C. Hari preeth, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No. 1 and Sri putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2. Perused the record.

2. This writ petition is filed challenging the hnal order dated 16.12.2024 issued by respondent No.2.

3. Petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the house bearing No.9-117, situated at padmavathi Nagar, Khanapur Village and Mandal, Nirmal District, presently under respondent No.2 - Municipality (for short, 'subject property). The subject propert5r was constructed after duly obtaining permission from the then Gram Panchayat Secretar5r, Khanapur panchayat. l KL,J W.P.No. 142 of 2025 2 Petitioner is in possession of the subject property and paying property tax to respondent No.2. Even then, respondents tried to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without following due procedure laid down under la"r,. Therefore, she has filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.17081 of 2022. When the said writ petition calne up for hearing, on 01.04.2022, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 - Municipality, on instructions, submitted to this Court that respondent No.2 - Municipality is removing the encroachments on the edsting 100 feet road and they will follow due process of law. Recording the said submission of learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondent No.2 Municipality, this Court disposed of the said Writ Petition directing respondent No.2 - Municipality not to interfere with the petitioner's possession over the subject property w'ithout following due process of law. Two and half years thereafter, respondent No.2 Municipality has issued notice, dated 19.11.2024 to the petitioner to submit KL,J W.P.No. 142 of 2025 -) documents such as Sanctioned Building Permission copy arrd ownership documents and other documents, if any, in respect of H.No.9-117, situated at Padmavathi Nagar, Khanapur, within seven (7) days. Petitioner has not submitted documents vide its reply, dated 25.11.2024.

4. Thereafter respondent No.2 has passed the impugned hnal order, dated 16.12.2024 stating that petitioner made construction by encroaching 52.6 Sq. yards of Nirmal to Khanapur Police Station 100 feet wide road. Report submitted by AD, Survey and Land Records, Nirmal district was relied upon. The site is situated at Mohammadiaya Colony, Khanapur and it is, to be removed. Petitioner failed to give valid explanation to the notice, dated 19.11.2024. Therefore, respondent No.2 - Municipa,tity directed the petitioner to remove the un- authorized construction within 15 days. Challenging the said fina1 order, petitioner liled the present writ petition. KL,J W.P.No.142 of 2025 4

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that vide notice, dated 79.L1.2O24, respondent No.2 requested the petitioner to furnish documents and petitioner has not furnished documents. But, respondent No.2 did not state about the alleged deviated portion or un-authorized construction specifically in the said notice. Without considering the documents and explanation, dated 25.11.2024 submitted by the petitioner, respondent No.2 has issued final order, dated

16.L2.2O24. The same is in violation of procedure 1aid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019. He has placed reliance on the principles laid down in the following two (2) judgments:

7. Musttnura Rajani a. Vijagautada Municipal C o rp o r atio n, Vij ag au adar

2. Common order, dated 25.O4.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.272O1 of 2021 and 1986 of 2022. ' zoqs 1:y elo rz , KL,J W.P.No. 142 of 2O2S 5

6. Whereas, Sri putta Iftishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has produced written instructions of respondent No.2, wherein it is stated that respondent No.2 has issued notice, dated 19.11.2024 and petitioner failed to submit explanation properly. On instructions, he would further submit that entire construction is illegal. Therefore, respondent No.2 has issued notice, dated 19. 11.2024 and considered the reply, dated 25. ll.2}24 submitted by the petitioner before passing final order. Therefore, there is no irregularity.

7. As discussed supra, vide order dated I L.O4.2O22 in W.P.No. 17950 of 2022, this Court directed the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner,s possession over the subject properties without following due process of law. Therefore, respondent No.2 has to follow the procedure laid down under the Telangana MunicipaJities Act, 2Ol9 by specifically mentioning the I KL,J W.P.No. 142 of 2025 6 d.eviated portion of the construction in the notice, dated lg.Il.2o24. Without mentioning the deviated portion or un-authorized construction specifically in the notice, dated 19.11.2024, respondent No'2 requested the petitioner to lurnish certain documents. Petitioner has not submitted copies of documents to respondent No'2' In fact, petitioner has to submit permission obtained by her from the then Gram Panchayath. Even now, she has not filed the permission obtained by her from the then Gram Panchayat, Khanapur. She has hled only renewal proceedings.

8. Though the petitioner is contending that she has obtained permission from the then Gram Panchayat, Khanapur, she has not submitted the sarne to respondent No.2 along with their reply, dated 25.17-2024 and she has not hled copy of the same before this Court.

9. As discussed supra, respondent No.2 - Municipality did not specilically mention that the petitioner has made , I I KL,J W.P.No. 142 of 2O2S 7 construction by encroaching into 16g.6 Sq. ya,rds in the notice, dated 19. 11.2024. Now, in the final order, dated 16.12.2024, respondent Io.2 _ Municipality directed the petitioner to remove the un-authorized construction made by the petitioner encroaching 52.6 Sq. yards i.e., Nirmal to Khanapur police Station. There is also reference to the report submitted by AD, Survey and Land Records, Nirmal district. IO. It is the specific case of the petitioner herein that the said report was behind back of the petitioner and while conducting the alleged survey no opportunity was given to her.

11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the entire action of respondent No.2 in issuing notice, dated 19. Ll.2O24 arrd final order, dated 16.L2.2O24 is in violation of principles of natural justice, also the procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 and also the pringiple laid down by this court in the aforesaid two KL,J W.P.No. 142 of 2025 8 (2) judgments. Therefore, both the notice, dated

19.17.2024 and final order, dated 16.12.2024 of respondent No.2 are liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside. L2. However, liberty is granted to respondent No.2 to conduct survey afresh by putting the petitioner on notice and affording her ar-r opportunity. Liberty is also granted to respondents to issue fresh notice to the petitioner specifically mentioning the details/ particulars of the un- authorized construction and deviated portion, granting SCVEN (7) days time to the petitioner to submit explanation. Thereafter take action, if any, against the petitioner herein. Respondent No.2 shall complete the aforesaid entire exercise within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

13. Accordingly, this Wirt Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. I I I KL,J W.P.No.142 of 2025 9 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. ,TRUE COPY' SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD ASS T NT REGISTRAR SECTION OFF ICER \ to' " ,. ,n" Principal secretz ; *xu*x'eil*"'rsm**H.{['$fli::i:#"?;; u. fo','lJ&, to GP FoR .MUNI.IPAL ADl/lNlsrRArloN & URBAN DEVELoPMENT , rr.bi].Et,i'i"itnu stJtu of Telangana' [oUT] 6- Two CD CoPies BN GJP &;,"A HIGH COURT DATED:3/0112025 ORDER WP.No.142 of 2025 f.' rF L. o ar' 1 .9 LL d. \tbs H !' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS .r)'rv