Mr. Hameeduddin Quadri v. 1. The State of Tetangana

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 appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of l\4andamus declaring the inaction on the part of Respondents Nos 2 and 3 in not cancelling the sanctioned plan and building permission issued in favour of the Respondent No. 4 vide file No. 3/C9/0109312O2O, Permit No. 3tCgtO21O8t2O2O dated 14-02-2020 (Annexure-1) over the non-existent property bearing H.No. 22-8-244 to 256/8 and 224-244 to 2591A situated at Yousuf Bazar, Chatta 8azar, Hyderabad., pending civil disputes in OS No' 783 of 2018 dated 08-11-2021 on the file of XX Junior civil Judge, city civil court, Hyderabad as illeqal, arbitrary and in gross violation of principles of natural justhe and in flagrant violation of Articles 14 and 3o0A of the constitution of lndia. I I Consequently, to direct the official respondent to cancel the sanctioned plan & building permission issued in favour of the Respondent No.4 vide file No. 3/C9/01093/2020, Permit No. 3/C9/02108/2020 dated 14-02-2020, over the non- existent property bearing H.No.22'8-244 to 256/8 and 22-8-244 to 259/4 situated at Yousuf Bazar, Chatta Bazar, Hyderabad., subiect matter of civil dispute in OS No. 783 of 2018 dated 08-1 1-2021 on the file of XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim suspension of the sanctioned plan and building permission issued in favour of the Respondent No.4 vide file No.3/C9/0109312020, Permit No. 31C910210812020 dated 14-O2-2O20, over the non-existent property bearing H.No. 22-8- 244 to 256/8 and 22-8-244 to 259/A situated at Yousuf Bazar, chatta Bazar, Hyderabad, pending adjudication of above writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petltioner : SRI SYED MOUNIS JAFER ABIDI Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for Respondent No.2&3:SRl RAPARATHI VENKATESH, SC FORGHMC Counsel for Respondent No.4 : The Court made the following: ORDER i i HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.989 of 2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing lor respondent Nos.2 and 3. Perused the record.

2. In view o[ the nature of relief sought by the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage dispensing with notice to respondent No.4'

3. Petitioner herein is claiming that he is the absoiute owner and possessor of house bearing No-22-8-257 admeasuring 141 Sq.yds situated at Yousuf Bazar, Hyderabad. When Sri Syed Zamin Hussain and other are interfered with his possession over the subject property, petitioner has hled a suit vide O.S.No.333 of 20 11 seeking perpetual injunction and the said suit was decreed. KL.J W.P.No.9a9 of2025 \ )

4. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that respondent No.4 created documents claiming right over the property bearing No.22-B-245/B admeasuring 52 Sq.yds situated at Yousuf Bazar, Chatta bazar, Hyderabad. Respondent No.4 filed a suit vide O.S.No.783 of 2018 against the petitioner and 3 others for perpetual injunction. Basing on the created documents and suppressing the fact that the suit in O.S.No.783 of 2Ol8 is pending, respondent No.4 has obtained the said building permit order, dated L4.O2.2O2O for construction of one stilt+2 upper floors. Therefore, petitioner has submitted a representation, dated

27.O7.2024 to respondent No.2 with a request to revoke the said building permit order. Despite receiving arrd acknowledging the said representation, respondent No.2 did not act upon the same. Aggrievecl by the said inaction of respondent No.2, petitioner filed the present writ petition.

5. Whert:as, Sri Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.2 will / -) KL.J w.P.No.989 or 2O2s consider the representation, dated 27.O7.2O24 submitted by the petitioner and take action strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act, 1955) by putting the petitioner and respondent No'4 on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. In the light of the said submissions, this Writ Petition

6. is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation, dated 27.O7 -2024 submitted by the petitioner and if the allegation made by the petitioner that respondent No.4 obtained building permit order, dated I4.O2.2O2O by suppressing the fact that O'S'No'783 of 2018 filed by him against the petitioner and 3 others is pending is found to be true, he shall take steps strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Act' 1955, by putting the petitioner and respondent No'4 on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing' However, it is made clear that respondent No'2 shall not consider the allegation made by the petitioner that t. 1 KL'J w P.No.989 of 2025 4 respondent No.4 obtained the said building permit order on the basis of fabricated document' which is not within the preview of respondent No'2' He shall consider the allegation of the misrepresentation of fact and false statement' if any' made by respondent No'4 while obtaining building permit order, dated 14.O2'2O2O' He shall complete the said exercise rrithin a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions' if any' pending in the Writ Petition sha1l stand closed' I/TRUE COPY// *3',J;k-Y'#".iihi#* secrtor'r%rrrcen \ '*;'Yt:[ifffl$1Hil:l:u."" and urban deveropment' ro' , [|;.,I :ii,S,1'"'nii!l'B?; JIH;[ ll*j:'jl " .i o ar co rpo ratio n, offi ce at, ra nk ? The Commissioner' Greater Hyderabad Municipi - Bund' Hydera0ao' Greater n*"':':' L-r.,.rorahacl Municipal corporation' circle . l,:"ril+1"::gr:T.31"' 4. one cc to SRI svEO ruour'rrs JAFER ABIDI Advocate toPucl , +g3,:rn::3ifi*;"tL 6. OneCCto SRI'RAPARATHI VENKATESH' SC FORGHMC IOPUCI 7 Two CD CoPies ADMN URBAN DEV' Hish court for the state of q BSK GJP HIGH COURT DATED:0910112025 oR 1HE S,-4 .:t (( 1 0 FrB 2025 c r) ?.., !'s;; ^ T(: ORDER WP.No.989 of 2025 I I I I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS