High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the high handed action the Respondent No.3 in issuing the lntimation letter Roc.No.42165/GWMCM .No.31lCir-llr l2O24 dated 23.12.2024 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust unsustainable and contrary to provisions of Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 colourable exercise of power and violative of Principles of Natural Justice, violative of Article No.14, 19 (1Xg), 300-A of the Constitution of lndia, consequently Set-aside the lntimation letter Roc.No.42 1 6S/GWMCAIV.No,31 lct-1 1 /2O24 dated 23.12.2024. lA NO: 'l 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 stay of all lntimation Letter Roc.No.42'165/GWMC,&V.No.31/Cir-1112024 dated 23.12.2024 issued by the Respondent No.3, pending disposal of main Writ Petition. further proceeding pursuant to Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.LAKSHMI KANTH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 TO 4: SRI PASHAM MOHITH, SC FOR Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI UNNAM SRAVAN KUMAR GWMC The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN trIRIT PETITION No.1563 OF 2o25 ORDER: Heard Sri S.Lakshmikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pasham Mohith, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and Sri Unnam Sravan, learned counsel appearing for 5th respondent.

2. Petitioner is claiming that she is the absclute owner and possessor of AC sheet roof house with open place admeasuring to an extent of 443.66 square yards in Survey No.125/C, situated at Hunter Road, beside HP Petrol Pump, Shayampet Jagir Revenue Village, Kazrpet Mandal, Hanamkonda District within the limits of 2"d respondent Municipal Corporation on the strength of a registered Gift Deed bearing Document No.25366 of 2022 dated 11.1O.2022. Petitioner has obtained building permit order dated

17.1O.2O22 from 2nd respondent for construction of ground floor + 1 upper floor. She has not started construction.

3. Perusal of record also would reveal that Manda Mariyamma and 7 others including petitioner's husband filed .- 2 a suit uide O.S.No.79 of 2O1O against the defendants therein seeking partition and separate possession of suit schedule property i.e., Acs. 1.04 guntas in Survey No. 125/C, situated at Shayampet Village, Hanamkonda Mandal, Warangal District.

4. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that learned trial Court granted status quo initially. Thereafter, the same was not extended' The said suit is pending. It is posted for trial.

5. While the matter stood thus, 2"d respondent has issued intimation letter dated 23.12.2024 directing the petitioner to vacate the premises ald remove the unauthorized constmction of shed and compound wall within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of the said order, failing which action will be taken against petitioner and her husband. Challenging the said intimation Ietter, petitioner filed the present writ Petition.

6. Perusal of record would also reveal that 2na respondent has issued notice dated 28. 11 -2022 to the petitioner herein cancelling the house number allotted and to 3 remove the unauthorized construction. Challenging the said notice, petitioner has filed a writ petition uide W.P.No.4333 I of 2O2. Vide order dated 01.12.2022, this Court dismissed the said writ petition.

7. Perusal of record would also reveal that sth respondent has submitted a representation dated 07.1O.2022 to the 2na respondent with a request to take action against petitioner for making unauthorized construction. The same was not considered. Therefore, she has hled a writ petition uide W.P.No.38294 of 2022. Vide order dated 13.10.2022, this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing 2"d respondent to take further action pursuant to notice dated O9.1O.2O22 issued by them to the unoffrcial respondents therein in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the said order, duly issuing notice to the unofficial respondents therein. Thereafter, 2"d respondent has issued notice dated 23. I2.2O24 to the petitioner herein stating that she has constructed a shed and compound wall unauthorizedlY. 4 -

8. On consideration of the aforesaid facts uide order dated 22.01.2O25, this Court directed respondent Nos.2 to 4 not to insist the petitioner to vacate the subject property till

24.O1.2025 arrd respondent Nos.2 to 4 shall demolish the said tin shed completely, for which the petitioner shall not object and this Court directed petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4 to file photographs.

9. Thereafter, learned counsel appearing for 5th respondent brought to the notice of this Court that theie is compound wall at two sides of the said property. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 did not demolish the compound wall completely.

10. Now learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and learned counsel appearing for Sth respondent, on instructions, would submit that respondent Nos.2 to 4 have completely demolished the compound wall and also the tin shed. The subject property is open place. The aforesaid suit urde O.S.No.79 of 2O1O is pending. As on today, there is no stafus quo order. Therefore, both petitioner and Sth respondent shall pursue the said suit. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 cannot direct 5 the petitioner to vacate from the subject property during pendency of the aforesaid suit.

11. In the light of the same, respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed not to interfere with the inter se disputes between petitioner and 5th respondent with regard to subject property. Liberty is granted to both petitioner and 5th respondent to raise all the grounds and contentions which they have raised in the present writ petition in O.S.No.79 of 2OlO and it is for the trial Court to consider the same. Impugned intimation letter dated 23.L2.2O24 of 2"d respondent is set aside to the extent of directing the petitioner to vacate from the subject property.

12. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs //TRUE COPY// SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL NT REGISTRAR ASSI ECTION OFFICER To t.

2. 4 5 6 7 8 I K. PS The Principal Secretary, State of Telangana, Municipal Administration and Urban Develooment. Secretariat, Hyderabad ih;t"-r';Gl-;n"r'iiu*tntonda, Greater Warangal Municipal Corporation' Hanamkonda District. D;;;i, co;;isiioner, Kazipet Circle-ll GWMC, Hanumakonda' The Aisistant Citv Planner, kazipet Circle-ll GWMC, Hanumakonda' d;'iC t,; bii5lnkSHvt KANTH, Advocate toPUCl i;; CC.i" ciFOn rrrrCpr_ Aorvru & URBAN dev, Hign Court for the State of Telanqana, at HYderabad. IOUTI ci";CC% sAt i'A'sH-nv HaoulrH.'sc FoR G-wtvlc-[oPUCl o;; ca io SCr ururunu SRAVAN, Advocate IoPUC] Two CD CoPies ,v- HIGH COURT DATED:1010212025 ORDER WP.No.1563 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS lHE s14 ).4. ( o o 2 0 rEB 2025 / I Iil f,.{' n /i'l c r- \ ) _---- \ \ ,,b )\ {,