The High Court · 2025

1. Smt. Bollepally Neela, W/o Bollepally Basavaiah, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o H.No. 2-4-21135 & 136112, Swaroopnagar Colony, Uppal, Medchal Malkajgiri District

2. lvikkili Prabhakar Paul, S/o M.Devadanam, Aged about 47 years, Occ.Director, Transfiguration Living Church, Plot No. 21 & 22, Swaroopnagar Colony, Uppal, Medchal lt/alkajgiri District.

3. Pogaru Naresh Goud, S/o P.Anand Goud, Aged about 54 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o Plot No. 12 Swaroopnagar Coloy, Uppal, Medchal Malkajgiri District. 4- Rampally Yallaiah, S/o Venkanna, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Business, R|/o Plot No. '10 & 11 Swaroopnagar Colony, Uppal, Medchal Malkajgiri District. 5. Smt. Guda Upendra, Wo. Guda Ravi, Aged about 40 years, Occ. Housewife Rl/o Plot No. 8 Swaroopnagar Colony, Uppal, IVledchal Malkajgiri District. 6. Smt. P. Dhana Laxmi, W/o V.Appa Rao, Aged about 50 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o Plot No.6 Swaroopnagar Colony, Uppal, Medchal Malkajgiri District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 2 J 4 5 The State of felangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Admn. and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. Greater Hyderabad lt/unicipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. The Depuly Commissioner, GHMC Uppal, Medchal Malkajgiri District. Hyderabad Disaster Response and Assets Monitoring and Protection Agency (HYDRA), Rep. by its Commissioner, 7th floor, Buddha Bhavan Tank Bund, Hyderabad. The Deputy City Planner, Hyderabad Disaster Response and Assets Monitoring and Protection Agency (HYDRA) Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition unde.r Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia p.aying that in the circumstances statr:d in the affidavit filed therewith, the l-1iglr Court hay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more lrarticularly one in the nature of writ c,f [\,4andamus, to declare the action of the respondent authorities 1 in threatening to d :molish the petitioners houses constructed in Sy. Nos. 1 35 and 136 situated at Swaroopnagar Colony, Uppal, Medchal Malkajgiri District, without any notice and without following the procedure contemplated urrder the Law, as being illegal, arbitr;try, unjust, unco nstitutional and violal.ive of Arlicle 21 and 300- A of the constitutio'r of lndia and consequently direct the respcrndent authorities not to take any coer,:ive steps without foliating the due process o1 Law. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition unde,'Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High courl may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities not to demolish the houses ol the petitioners constructed in Sy. \os. 135 and 136 situated at Swar,lopnaga- Colony, Uppal, Medchal IValkajgiri [)istrict, pending disposal of the main Writ peti.:ion, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. P. VIJAYA LAKSHMI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: cP FOR MUNtCIpAL ADMtNtSTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI SRINIVASA RAO pArlHWA, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.4 & 5: SRI K. RAVINDER REDDy, SC FOR HYDRA The Court made th,-" following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.53l I OB 2025 ORDER: Heard Smt. P. Vijayatakshmi, Iearned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Srinivasa Rao Pachwa, lear-ned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 and Sri Katika Ravinder Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4.

2. The petitioners are 6 in nurnber. They are claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors ol the houses mentioned below:- Petitioner No.1 Petitioner No.2 Petitioner No.3 Petitioner No.4 Petitioner No.5 Petitioner No.6 Situated at District. H.No.2-.1-2ll l5 &1361 12 Plot Nos.l I and 22 I{.No.2 4-2l1i5 &136117, nofihem part H.No.2-.1-2ll 35 & Ii6/l 0 H.No.2-4-21135 &136/8 ILNo.2-4-2lli5 &136/6 Swaroopnagar colony, IJppal. Medchal Malkajgiri They are living in the said houses. In proolof the same, they have filed copies of sale deeds and tax receipts etc. Even then, respondent Nos.2 to 5 tried to demolish the subject structures without following due procedure laid down under larv. Chattenging the said action of \ \ respondent Nos.2 to 5, the petitioner fited the present writ petition.

3. Whereas, Sri Srinivasa Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 and Sri Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned Standi 'rg counsel appearing respondent No.'1, on instfuctlons, would submit ,l.ra1 there is tank catled 'Nallach:rur u' in tJppal' 4'h respondent u,irtr the help of Inigation and revenut: olflr:ials. conducted inspection lor t he purpose of fixing FTL area and to prctect the said tank. I{eyenu,: olllcials have tnade some nrarkin-us llorvcver'. on cornpletion o ' said survey, they wilt take acl ion' il anl'' agair-rst petitioners het t:in strictly in accordance with ttre procedr- re laid down undcr law.

4.[ntht:lightofthesaidsubmission,thiswlitpetitionisdisposed of directitig tfLt: respondent Nos.2 to 5 not to disl,osscss t re petitioners fron-r the subject property and not to demolish the sttuctures without following duc procedure laid down under law Tl.ris o rder will not preclude thc r:spondent Nos.2 to 5, revenue and irrigation olficials from taking action rrqainst the petitioners in case ofan1' r'iolatior ' Conseqr- ently, miscellaneous petitions, if anv, pcndi rg in this ivrit petition, shall srtand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR h"-. sE,Dro( 6Frrcea

1. The Principal l;ecretary, Municipal Admn. and Urban Develotr:'ment oeoartmeht. f he Statei of Telarigana' Secretariat, HYderabac - 2. Thi: Commiss;ioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Clrporallol' lanK uuno' s. i6"beoriv C;ommissioner, GHMC Uppal, Medchal Malkajgir District +. rn" Co[rriisi;ioner, Hyderibad Disast6r Response and Asse'ts Moritoring Hvderabad. -l'ank anO protection ngehcy (HYDRA), 7th floor, Buddha Bhavan Hyderabad- Bund,

5. The Deputy ()ity Planner, Hyderabad Disaster Resprlnse anc Assets Monitoring-arrcl'Protection Agency (HYDRA) Hyderacad. 6. one cc t6 sh/T P. VIJAYALAKSHMI, Advocate [oPUC] 7. One CC to SIll SRINIVASA RAO PACHWA, SC for GHIVC [()PUC] 8. One CC to Slll K. RAVINDER REDDY, SC for HYDRA [OPL C] 9. Two CCs to (lP FOR IvIUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATIC)N & URtriAN DEVELOPI\,4t: \T, High Court for the State of Telangana. ['3LlT] I To,

10. Two CD Cop €'s >==---=' BN ,/K- HIGH COUR DATED:2010:212025 ORDER WP.No.5311 of 2025 .s \n' c i\ \ls \\ \: - ._,\,- ,'i :) i! i + .l DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CCISTS ,/3 I 4 I ,/,s zZs