Sri K. Mahadev Maharaj v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, issuing notice dt.30.12 _2o24 for calling for furnishing documents without furnishing the complaint copy and documents dated. 17.12.2024 and issuing notice beyond Jurisdict'ron of the HYDRAA, as illegal, arbitrary, and unjust and violation of the Articles 300-4 and 21 of the constitution of tndia and principles of natural justice and consequenfly direct the respondents to set-aside the sanre. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the impugned notice dt.3}t12t2O24 including demolition of the Petitioner property' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B' SHIVA KUMAR CounselfortheRespondentNo'1:GPFORMUNICIPALADMINISTRATION& URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI K' RAVINDER REDDY' SC FOR HYDRAA l The Court made the following: ORDER I I I I I i I ,,.7 I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAIISHMAN WRIT PETITIO N No.7bDo f2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner andSriKatikaRavinderReddy,learnedStandingcounsel appearing for respondent Nos'2 and 3' Perused the record.

2. Petitioner herein is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac'1-00 gts'' in Sy.No.58 situated at Hastinapuram colony' Karmanghatvillage,SaroornagarMandal'RangaReddy district,onthestrengthofanun-registeredgift settlement deed O6'11'1983, which was impounded on O3.01.2OO4.Hehasconstructedtemple'threedwelling houses, one Tin shed and also one Gowshala in the said property. He is in possession of the said proper$r' When Hastinapuram North Welfare Association and its members interfered with the possession of the wife of the I I KL,J W.P.No.755 ot 2025 1 petitioner, they hled a suit vide O.S.No.322 of.2O13 for perpetual injunction. The sarne was decreed on

29.O7.2016. Vide order dated 28.03.2023, in C.M.A.No.4O of 2018 the appeal filed by the defendants therein was also dismissed. A notice dated 28.08.2013 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, GHMC, K.B. Nagar, Circle-III, Hyderabad cancelling the LRS proceedings obtained by the petitioner on 23.O1.2012. Challenging the said notice, petitioner herein and 4 others filed a Writ Petition vide W.P.No.26254 of 2O13 and this Court vide order dated LL.LO.2O22 set aside the said order on the ground that the Deputy Commissioner, GHMC has no jurisdiction to cancel the LRS proceedings.

3. In the meanwhile, respondent No.2 has issued notice dated 30. L2.2O24 alleging that he has received a complaint dated 17. 12.2024 stating that the petitioner encroached open space layout related to North Hastinapuram Colony Park, Karmanghat Division, I II I i I I .-ll KL,J W.P.No.755 of 2025 3 situated at L.B. Nagar. Therefore, respondent No'2 requested the petitioner to submit t-lle following documents for verification: i. Copy of Sanctioned plan and its proceedings. ii. Copy of Registered Documents of Property' iii. Copy of Link Documents. iv. Copy of LaYout Plan. v. Details of Court cases (if anY) Three (3) days time was granted to the petitioner to submit the said documents. Petitioner has submitted interim reply, dated 02.01.2025 furnishing following documents:

1. Copy of regularization of unapproved layout proceedings, dated 23 -O l.2O 12. 2. Cash receipts and property receipts. 3. The Gift Deed along with translation. 4. Copy of the Judgment in W.P.No.26254 of 2013, dated 11.1O.2O22.

5. Copy of the Judgment and decree in O'S'No'322 of 2O13, dated 29.O7 .2O 16.

6. A copy of order in C.M.A.No'4O of 2018- dated 2a.o3.2023. KL,J W.P.No.755 of 2O25 4 However, petitioner also sought for copy of the said complaint, dated 17.12.2024 referred in the impugned notice, dated 30.12.2024. But, the s€une was not furnished to him. Without considering the said interim reply dated O2.OL.2O25, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. Therefore, he has liled the present writ petition challenging the impugned notice, dated 3O. 12.2024.

4. Whereas, Sri Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned Standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, on instructions, would submit that respondent Nos.2 and 3 received complaints from citizens over Telephone. If the complaint, dated 17.L2.2O24 referred in the impugned notice, dated 30.12.2024 is a written complaint, respondent No.3 will furnish the same to the petitioner herein, otherwise, he will inform the petitioner that he has received complaint through a phone call. Respondent I I I KL,J W.P.No.755 of 2O25 5 No.3 will consider the interim reply submitted by the petitioner and take action against the petitioner, strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under law, by putting the petitioner and complainant on notice and allording them an opportunity of hearing. He would further submit that petitioner has made construction over the land earmarked for the purpose of park without obtaining prior permission from the GHMC.

5. In the light of the said submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to consider the interim reply, dated O2.O1.2O25 to the impugned notice, dated 3O.L2.2O24 and also the aforesaid six (6) documents submitted by the petitioner and take action, strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down ) ) under law, by putting the petitioner and complainant on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. I I Respondent No.3 shali not insist the petitioner to furnish copy of layout plan i.e., document No.4 in the impugned i . I I I I i I KL,J W.P.No.755 of 2O25 6 notice. Liberty is granted to respondent No.3 to obtain the said layout plan from GHMC authorities or any other source. If, respondent No.3 received written complaint, dated 17. 12.2024 he shall furnish copy of the same to the petitioner herein within one week from today. Liberty is also granted to respondent No.3 to seek additional - information, if any, from the petitioner and GHMC a authorities. Liberfy is also granted to the petitioner to submit additional reply / respondent No.3 shall complete the said exercise within a final reply. However, period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shatl be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. a i c t //TRUE COPY// SD/.P.CH.NAGABHU SHAM BA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I -1 l\L J 'sEcTtoN OFFTCER To,

1. The Principar secretary to-Govemment, Municipal Administration and Urban t Devetopment The Statb of retangini, bJii"il.r!]'iWerauro. ^ 2. The commissioner, The Hyderabld iri"*tti nEip"'ise and Asset protection Agency (HYDRAA), 7th Ftrior, Budha BhaGn, iii'nigrnj, t"nkir;;,'-'""""" Secunderabad. Agency (HYDRAAj.

3. lnspector of porice, Hyderabad Disaster Response ant Asset protection 1 9r" cc ro SRt B. SHtvA KUMAR, Advocate topucl i 9nu cc to SRt K RAVTND-ER REbDy, Sc'FbI ilibnaa topucl 0 lg9.pc^s_t9_Gp FoR rr,rur.rrdrpAI ebrriNrsiEiir'or.r & URBAN DEVELOPMENT. Hioh court fo.tn,j Si"'i i' of i"ranf,ana. 1OUr1 7. Two CD Copies BN/B SK t YA I HIGH COURT DATED:0810112025 ORDER WP.No.755 ot 2025 k oR f H€ S 14 J .:J .J I I 20rEs 2u6 -l' ,r. * t,.'l DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 4t aqtr- \"c..t g)' I