The High Court · 2025

B Damodhar Reddy, S/o Not Known to the petitioner(owner of the building ) age about 55 yrs Occ Business Rl/o plot no 30 Sri Sai Nagar Jahangir Nagar Colony Chintalkunta Ranga Reddy District ...RESPONDENTS 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 declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 to in not taking any action on the E- Mail letter dated '13-10-2024 and 8-1-2025 as illegal arbitrary and violation of Article 14,21 of Constitution of lndia. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 Respondent No. 4 to remove the illegal structure of the Respondent No.S on the Plot No 30 Sri Sai Nagar, Jahangir nagar Colony Nagarjuna Sagar Road Chintal kunta Ranga Reddy Dist forthwith. 7 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI U.V. SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 4: SRI SRINIVAS RAO PACHAWA, SC FOR GHMC Counsel forthe Respondent No.S: SRI K. ASHOK REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER : I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAI(SHMAN WRIT PETITION No.l30l of 2025 ORDER: Heard leamed counsel appearing on behalf ol the petitioner, Sri Srinivas Rao Pachaw4 leamed Standing Counsel for GHMC, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 and Sri K.Ashok Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalfofthe respondent No.5.

2. According to the petitioner, respondent No.5 obtained building permission vide order dated 13.06.2023 for construction of commercial building for consisting 2 Cellars +Ground + 4 Upper floors (4th floor with TDR). But, he is proceeding with the construction of 5e floor over and above the said permission. Therefore, the petitioner submitted representations dated, 13.10.2024 and 08.O1.2025 with respondent Nos.2 to 4 with a request to take action against respondent No.5. Despite receiving an acknowledgment of the said representations, the respondent Nos.2 to 4 did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent Nos.2 to 4, the petitioner frled the present writ petition.

3. Whereas leamed Standing Counsel for GHMC, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 has produced the written instructions of the Assistant Chief City Planneq GHMC dated 09.11 .2024 stating that 2 on receipt ol the afbresaid representations, he has issued notice dated

09.01.2025 to the respondent No.5 seeking explanation as to why action shall not taken against respondent No.5 for making construction in deviation to the building permission. Seven days time was granted to submit. On submission of explanation, he will take action against respondent No.5 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the GHMC Act, 1955 by putting the respondent No.5 on notice by giving an opportunity of personal hearing.

4. Whereas Sri K. Ashok Reddy, leamed counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.5, on instructions, would submit that the respondent No.5 is also submitted representation to the respondent No.2 with a. request to provide TDR Rights with regard to the land of the respondent No.5 acquired by GHMC and the said application is pending.

5. At this stage. leamed counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on instructions, would submit that the respondent No.5 is proceeding with construction of 5th floor during late nights with the help of labor.

6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.5 will not proceed with construction of I I I l the 5ft floor and he will proceed with the construction strictly in accordance with the aforesaid building permission.

7. In the light of the said submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Chiel City Planner, GHMC, to inspect the site, if the allegation made by the petitioner is found to be correct, take action against respondent No.5 strictly in accordance with law pursuant to notice dated 09.01.2025, explanation, if any, submitted by the respondent No.5. Respondent No.2 shall dispose of the application submitted by respondent No.5 seeking TDR Rights within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt ofa copy of this order. Ifthere is any deviation in construction as per the building permission, liberty is granted to respondent Nos.3 and 4 and the Chief City Planner, GHMC, to take action against respondent No.5 in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Pctition shall stand clased, SD/-P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER \ To, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Iy* ThePrincipalsecretary,MunicipalAdministrationTheStateofTelangana, Secretariai Buildings, HYderabad in. cii.n1iiiioner"dreiter Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Lower tank bund Hvderabad ir'd%iiicJnmissioner GHMC, L.B.Nagar, Ran-ga Reddv Disligt'^. o"irw Corriisioner CUTUC, L i3 Nagaicircle, Saroornagar, R R'Dist' 5"E-ic t" sni tl.V. on; cc io SHi Sntruives RAo PACHAWA, sc FoR-GHMC [oPUC] One CC to SRI K. ASHOK REDDY, Advocate [OPU-C] - il; ac"i" GF Fon rr,turutctpAL ADMlNlsrRArloN & URBAN oEViloitr,lEtlT, High Court for the State of Telangana' [oUT] Two CD Copies BN BS KUMAR, Advocate to!,qcl -Suiesu . I I CC TODAY HIGH COURT DATED:1010112025 ..l. r ,i. 1 HE STAT c ( t o 24lN mffi ORDER WP.No.1301 of 2025 \ Dr q;, DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @ K