High Court · 2025

l ii1t##s*li,r{**I*f,?:8,#"i,rH,,[lir, +=r.- ' l3l'I3lllf#.'^:',fi,:3il1:? 8:::t:,s:js Rock church, Marakpet D No 14-A petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the rd respondent in not acting upon the representation of the petitione r dt. 28.10.2013 by initiating action against the 3rd respondent to stop illegal construction of 3rd froor in the Rock church, Malakpet, Hyderabad as i'egar, arbitrary and contrary to the very provisions of Hyderabad Municipar corporation Act, 1g65 and rures thereon and consequenry direct the 2nd respondent to take necessary action against the 3rd respondent for iregar construction of 3rd floor in the Rock Church, Malakpet, Hyderabad without any valid permission or approval. i I i l l I I -2-- l.A. NO: 1OF 2O13ffiPMP. NO: 39050 0F 2013) 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 direct the 2nd respondent to stop construction activities of 3rd floor in the Rock church, Malakpet, Hyderabad forthwith, pending disposal of the main writ petition lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under section i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to receive the document i.e. (l) BRS application submitted before the GHMC, (ii) Receipt dt.31-12-201s issued by GHMC and (iii) Latest photographs in respect of the premises in WP No.3'1433 ot 2013. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.VASANTH RAO Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: cp FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRt RAPARTH| VENKATESH, SC FOR DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI CH.RAVINDER GHMC W.P.NO:3671 I OF 2013 Between: 5" 3il111["R1'X;l.t-fir]|-3;#'ni' Ased 64 vears Prot No 2e6, Rock rown AND ...PETITIONER Bund, Hyderabad 'l . The Govemment of Andhra pFO":[ Rep. by its principal Secretary. ^ lVlunicipal Administration and. Rurar oeve'toprirent, Secrbtariai, Hyo,iiaoao 2. The commissioner, Greater Hyderabad M-Jnicipit corporafion, fo*er rank 3. K Timothy, S/o. Late Samuel, Aged.56 years, Occ pastor in Rock Church, _ Malakpet D.No.14-A (c )Asmang'adh, trrt'aiat<p'et. Hvderabad 4. K..John samuel, Sio. K. T-imothy,.Aged 2g y6ars, Rock Church, Malakpet _ D.No.14-A (c )Asmangadh, fr/alatp"et. Hvd6rab;il 5. K. Martha Timothv. W/o K. Timothy., Rg6O SZ years Rock Church, Malakpet D. No.'t 4-A (c ) Asmangadh, rrrrJrrtddt, ijvJ#ti"?5o ' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affiiravit fired therewith, the High court may be J- pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not taking action on the representation made by the petitioner dated 04-02-2013 tor initiating action against the respondents 3 to 5 in not preventing the illegal construction and changing the nature and edifice of the Rock Church Building at Malakpet, Hyderabad, by converting the church building into a residential one for their personal use without valid permission as illegal, arbitrary_ and contrary to the very provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act., 1955 and rules made thereunder and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to take necessary action forthwith against the respondents 3 to 5. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 4s663 OF 2013) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in suppo( of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to stop the illegal construction being made in the Rock Church premises at Asmangadh, Malakpet, Hyderabad, by respondents 3 to 5, by converting the church building into a residential one, contrary to the sanctioned plan as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the very provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, pending disposal of the main writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 receive the document i.e. (i) BRS application submitted before the GHMC, (ii) Receipt dt.31-12-2015 issued by GHMC and (iii) Latest photographs in respect of the premises in WP No.36719 of 2013. -k l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(WVMP. NO: 4088 OF 2013) Between:

1. K. Timothy, S/o. Late Samuel, Aged 56 years, Occ Pastor in Rock Church, Malakpet D.No.'14-A (c )Asmangadh, Malakpet, Hyderabad

2. K. John Samuel, S/o. K. Timothy, Aged 28 years, Rock Church, Malakpet D.No. l4-A (c ) Asmangadh, Malakpet, Hyderabad

3. K. Martha Timothy, Wo. K. Timothy., Aged 52 years Rock Church, Malakpet D.No.'14-A (c ) Asmangadh, Malakpet, Hyderabad-36 ...PETITIONERIRESPONDENT Nos.3,4,5 AND

1. T. Ravindranath, S/o. T.S. Mani, Aged 64 years Plot No.296, Rock Town Colony, L.B Nagar, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary. Municipal Administration and Rural Development, Secretariat, Hyderabad 3. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Lower Tank Bund, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT 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 vacate the interim direction granted in W.P.M.P.No.45663/ 13 in W.P.No.367'19/ 13 dt.13-12-2013 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.VASANTH RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1: cP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI RAPARTHI VENKATESH, SC FOR Gounsel forthe Respondent Nos.3 TO 5: SRI CH.RAVINDER GHMC DEV The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER f THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION NoS.3 433 and 36719 of 2013 COMMON ORDER: The writ petitions are filed to declare the action of the respondent No.2 in not considering the representations of the petitioners dated 28.10.2013 and 04.02.2073 for initiating action agalnst the unofficial respondents and preventing the illegal constructlon of third floor and changing the nature of Rock Church. Malakpet, Hyderabad, as belng illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Mr. K. Vasanth Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Raparthi Venkatesh, learned standing counsel for GHMC and Mr. Ch. Ravinder, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 in WP.No.31433 of 2013 and respondents No.3 to 5 in WP.No.36719 of 2013.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Rock Church was established in the year 1985 and petitioners are the members of the church, which has around 300 to 500 members. The church was constructed with the funds donated by church members and also the relatives of the members . of the church. The respondent No.3 had been working as a Pastor of the church since 1995 till date and he is paid salary and other allowances from the church funds. The respondent No.3, taking advantage of being 2 continued as Pastor for a long period, started mlsusing the funds of the church and intended to construct his residence on the third floor of the church.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that initially permission was granted to construct ground floor (prayer hall) and subsequently, first and second floors were constructed. The grievance of the petitioners is that without there being any valid permission. the respondent No.3 proceeded to construct the third floor for his residential purpose. As such, the petitioners and other members of the church made a representation to the respondent No.2 for taking action against the respondent No.3 for making illegal construction. However, no action is taken on such representation.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 submltted that BRS application vide application No.2000060876 was submitted by the respondent No.3 by paying requisite fee and pending consideration of BRS application, direction be issued to the respondent No.2 not to take any action.

6. It is not in dispute that the respondent No.3 raised third floor and BRS application is pending. i- n

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submifted that in view of 3 the status quo order passed by the Supreme Court of India, the BRS scheme has been kept in abeyance and in cases, where BRS applications are pending, status quo was directed to be maintained in respect of structures.

8. In view of the above, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 not to take any action against the unofficial respondents In connection with the third floor constructed in the Rock Church, Malakpet, Hyderabad, until disposal of the BRS application vide application No.2000060876. The miscellaneous petitions pendlng, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. To //TRUE COPYII SD/.P. PADMANABHA REDDY DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER 1 2 The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Secretariat, Hyderabad, Goverriment of Telanoan I he Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Munici"pa Bund, Hyderabad Rural Development, a a I Corporation, Lower Tank

9. 9n" CC to SRI K.VASANTH RAO, Advocate tOpUCI 1. 9ne CC to SRt RAPARTHTvENKAIF_SH, SiFbntnnac t 5. TIvo-CCs to GP FoR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND undnru oev - the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. fOan - - 9. gne CC to SRt CH.RAV|NDER, Advocaie IOirUCl 7. Two CD Copies oPUCI , High Court for PSK BS K1LI. cY HIGH COURT DATED:23104t2025 COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.31433 AND 36719 of 2011 - ( 0 o o l.iF-:;i-4/ A <.^ 02 tirr ?0?5 tji.s,,a-cr.f,o a (i t DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS cd0{iei -k-"