'1 . P.Venkata Ramana Redd v. 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 direction, order or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of tt/andamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in not taking any action against the Respondent No.6, despite the receipt of the series of representations dated 28.12.2024, 15.6.2024, 7.2.2024, as the Respondent No.6 is constructing the warehousesigodowns, without obtaining any permission from I I ; I i the Respondent No.5 and also constructing the warehouses/godowns on 120 wide Road, in Sy.No.55B, situated at Rampally Dayara Village, Keesara mandal, Medchal-lvlalkajgiri District, which is contrary to Master Plan, as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to settled principles of law, and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 to demolish the warehouses/godowns, constructed by the Respondent No.6 in the land admeasuring Ac.2.20 gts. in Sy.No.SS B situated at Rampally Dayara Village, Keesara Mandal, Medchal-l\rlalkajgiri District. 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.S to stop the construction of warehouses/godowns by the Respondent No.6, in the land admeasuring Ac.2.20 gts. in Sy.No.558 situated at Rampally Dayara Village, Keesara l\,4andal, IV1edchal-Malkajgiri District. lA NO: 2 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 Nos. 2 and 5 to consider the representation dated 15.6.2024 and

28.12.2024 respectively, submitted by the Petitioners. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI GADDAM SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondents No.2 & 3: SMT. D. MADHAVI, S.C. FOR HMDA Counsel for the Respondent No.4: AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No.s: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, S.C. FOR MUNICIPALITIES Counsel for the Respondent No.6: - The Court made the following: ORDER I ORDER: I l I I I I HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE K. LAKSIIMAN WRIT PETITION No.2735 of 2o25 Heard Sri Gaddam Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt.D. Madhavi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.4 and Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.5. Perused the record.

2. In view of the nature of relief sought by the petitioners, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage dispensing with notice to respondent No.6.

3. Petitioners herein are claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors of land admeasuring Ac.4-23 gts., in Sy.Nos.558 and 559 situated at Rampally Dayara village, Keesara Mandal, Medcha-l-Malkajgiri W.P.No.2735 ol 2025 :' KL,J z district, within respondent No.5 Municipality. Respondent No.6 is making construction of godowns without obtaining prior permission from respondent No.5 and it is un-authorized construction. Therefore, they have submitted representations dated 07.O2.2O24,

15.06.2024 and 28.12.2024 to respondent No.5 with a request to take action against respondent No.6. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, respondent No.5 did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent No.5, petitioner filed'the present writ petition.

4. Whereas, Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Stalding Counsel appearing for respondent No.5, on instructions, would submit that during regular inspection by officials of respondent No.5 they came to know that respondent No.6 is erecting pillars, rooms and making construction un-authorizedly in the land in Sy.No.558 of Rampally. Therefore, the field sta-ff of respondent No.5 directed respondent No.6 to stop work and obtain permission from I - KL,J W.P.No.2735 of 2025 J respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 has issued a Shorv Cause Notice, dated lO.Ol .2025 to respondent No.6 granting seven (7) days time to submit explanation. She has not submitted explanation. Therefore, respondent No.5 has passed a speaking order dated 27.01.2025 directing respondent No.6 to remove the said un- authorized construction. She has not removed the same. Respondent No.5 will take further action against respondent No.6, strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019. He has also furnished copies of Show Cause Notice dated LO.OI.2O25 and speaking order, dated

27.OI.2025. The same are placed on record.

5. In the light of the aforesaid submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.S to take all further necessary steps pursuant to speaking order dated 27.O1.2O25 to stop construction and to remove the un-authorLed construction made by respondent No.6, strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down \ I t ,gi}fdr \ \ W.P.No.2735 of 2025 t' KL,J 4 under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019. He shall complete the said exercise within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Liberty is also granted to respondent No.6 to challenge the speaking order dated 27.O1.2O25. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 1)\'f/.- OI{ OFFICER SECTI 'l . The Principal Secretary, State of Telangana, [Vlunicipal Administration and Urban Devblopment De'partment, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. fhe Commissioner, Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Ameerpet, Hyderabad.

3. The Managing Director, Outer Ring Road Projecl, Hyderabad Growth Corridor, Hyderabad.

4. The Additional Collector (Local Bodies), Medchal-Malkajgiri District. 5. The Commissioner, Nagaram IVunicipality, Nagaram, tr/edchal-fvlalkajgiri District tr/alkajgiri District.

6. One CC to SRI GADDAI\4 SRINIVAS, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad- [OUT] B. One CC to Str/T D. IUADHAVI, S C. for HMDA [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

10.One CC to SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, S.C. for Ir/unicipalities [OPUC] I I To,

11.Two CD Copies MP GJP / l l l i I I 'l I I I I j i I i Ili HIGH COURT DATED:311O112025 t o L. ,l e. /, .\" ',1 EI >- - r G4 '.i/ ORDER WP.No.2735 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS /: ,,/, , i: 'i, . \,;i \ /5 1,4 z^./a ,-) v/ ttd/<-.'