High Court · 2025

Smt. Thakur Soni Bai, D/o Late Thakur Someshwar Singh, Aged about 38 vears, Occ. Home maker Rl/o H.No.'1-1-4511 , Mohan Nagar, Kothapet, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana-35 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 oI 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 of certiorari or any other appropriate writ Order or direction, declaring action of the Respondent No.3 in rejecting my application No.012631/GHMCi5802/LBN2 12024-BP dt.12.11.2024 vide Rejection Letter dt.1}.12.2024 as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to law and violative of Articles 14 86 300A of Constitution of lndia and direct the Respondent No. 3 to consider my application Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ARCHANA N Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2.to 4: SRI SRINIVASA RAO PACHWA SC FOR Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Counsel forthe Respondent No.S: SRI K.S SUNEEL The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.l909 OF 2025 ORDER: Heard Sri Archana Nanda, leamed counsel for the petitioners, Sri Srinivasa Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and Sri K.S.Suneel, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5.

2. The petitioners are claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors of the land admeasuring 780 sq.yards in Sy.No. 142 situated in Block No.l, CTO Colony, Kothapet, Uppal Revenue Mandal, Medchal -Malkajgiri District, on the strength of registered sale deed bearing document No.12943 of20l9, dated 23.08.2019. 3 5'h respondent has filed a suit vide O.S.No. 148 of 2023 against the petitioners (defendant Nos.13 and 14) and others for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties and also for cancellation of the aforesaid sale deed. Along with the said suit, she has also filed two Interlocutory Applications vide I.A.Nos.812 and 813 of 2023 seeking ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants herein from creating third party interest or alienating and charge encrumbrance upon certain suit schedule properties and also from proceeding with I 2 construction. vide order dated 23.08.2023,\earned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, - cum - Mettopolitan Sessions Judge' in I A'No'812 of2023ino.S.No.l43of2023,dilectedtheparliestomaintainstatus quo existing as on that date in all respects over the suit schedule propefiy. In LA.No.S13 of 2023,tlie trial Couft ordered notice' Both the Interlocutory Applications are pending The status qzo is subsisting' While the matter stood thus, the petitioners have submitted an application dated 12. 1 1.2024 withrespondent - GHMC with a request to grant permission for construction of a house uploading all the documents under Telangana State Building Permission and Approval and Self Certification System (for short, 'TS bPASS Act')' 2020 along with self-declaration and self-certification. on receipt of the said application, 3'd respondent has issued shortfali irrtimation letter dated

27.11.2024 to the petitioners herein stating that a suit vide O'S'No'148 of 2023 is pending and the trial Courl granteci status quo order ' 3'd respondent directed the petitioners to comply with the said shoftfalls' The petitioners have submitted explanation dated 02'12'2024' I'he same was not considered. Without considering the sa,e, 3'd respondent has rejected the application dated 12'11'2024 submitted by the petitioners seeking permission lor construction' 4 Challenging the same, the petitioners filed the present writ 3 petrtlon.

5. Perusal of the rejection order dated 10.12.2023 would reveal that there is no consideration of explanation dated 02.12.2024 submitted by the petitioners to the shortfall intimation dated27.11.2024. There is no consideration of the aforesaid stqtus quo order in I.A.No.812 OF 2023 in O.S.No.148 of 2023.

6. As per Section 7(11) ofthe TS bPASS Act,3'd respondenthas to consider the following aspects:- 1 . Misrepresentation/suppression of facts.

2. False statement, if any, made by the petitioners while submitting the application dated 12.1 1.2024. Admittedly, as on the date of application dated l2.ll.2l24,the aforesaid suit filed by 5'h respondent, is pending and the aforesaid status quo order granted by the trial Couft is subsisting. By the aforesaid order, the parties have to maintain status quo as on that date over the suit schedule property. The said status quo order is subsisting and the two Interlocutory Applications are pending. There is no consideration of all I , the aspects by the 3'd respondent in the impugned order dated

10.12.2024 rejecting the representation dated 12.11.2024 of the , I petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4

7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this writ petition is allowed. '[he impugned order dated 10.12.2024 of respondent No.3, is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the 3d respondent with a direction to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioners, dated

12.11,.2024, shortfall intimation letter dated 27.11.2024, pendency of the aforesaid suits and two Interlocutory Applications and slarzrs quo order granted by the trial Court directing the parties to maintain status quo with regard to the sub.iect property in all respects and pass an orders afresh by putting the petitioners and 5'h respondent on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. However, he shall complete the aforesaid exercise within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Liberty is granted to both the petitioners and 5th respondent to raise all the grounds/contentions which they have raised in the present writ petition before the 3'd respondent and it is for the 3'd respondent to consider the same. In the circumstances of the case. there is no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition. shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. T. TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, MA and UD' Secretariat Buildings' Hyderabad' 2. The Municipal Commissioner' GHMC Buiding' Tankbund'Hyderabad 'l 3. Zonal Commissibner, GHMC' East Zone'V-Circle' L B'Nagar Hyderabad- 500074 e{-: The City Planner, GHMC, East Zone, LB nagar. One CC to SRt. ARCHANA N Advocaie [OPUC] OBe CC to SRt K.S SUNEEL Advocate tOpUCl One GC to SRt SR|N|VASA RAO PACHWA SC FOR Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation tOpUCI Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUTJ Two CD Copies

9. KKS GJP HIGH COURT DATED:1 310212025 ORDER WP.No.1909 of 2025 I I ( :) ,) rJ '.t' sr4 -\". f.- ' :.. , '.L v C, .L .A" 2 B FiB 2025 * UF SPATCH ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \),- w