High Court · 2025

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 pteaseo to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of iiilandamus declaring the action of the of the Respondent No.3 in issuing the impugned proceedings through vide Notice No.Gliuc-7s^^/No.03/P/NMC/2025, aatei tz.ob..ZO25 by directing the Petitioner to remove the deviations within (15) days on the House No.6-164/C/292lA./1 , which is situated Pragathi Nagar, Bathupally Village and Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District and also interfering into the peacefuibusiness activity of the petitioner in the above building and lifting the chaiis and stopping the inauguration work in the building and disturbing the business activities of tbnant of the petitioner and creating panic situations and without giving the opportunity to submit the explanation straight away trying to demolisli tnJ ouitOing of the Petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, 15,21 and 300-A of Constitution of lndia and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice and to set aside the impugned notice through vide proceeding No. G1/UC-7SM No.O3iPlNMC/2025, dated. 12.02.2025 consequently direct the respondent No.3 not to interfere into the peaceful possession. of the [etilonefs buitding bearing H.No.6-164/C/292tN1, Pragathi Nagar, Bachupally Village and Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District and not to disturb the business activities of tenant of the petitioner and not to demolish the building of Petitioner 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.3 not to interfere into the peaceful possession of the petitioner's building bearing H,No.6- 164lcl292lAl1 , Pragathi Nagar, Bachupally Village &- Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District and not to disturb the business activities of tenant of the petitioner and not to demolish the building of Petitioner pending disposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2&3: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY SC FOR MAUD&MC The Cour.t made the following: ORDER I I I I I I ! I l // ) HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.5434 of2025 ORDER: ' Heard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Putta Iftishna Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos'2 and 3' Perused the record.

2. Petitioner has obtained building permit order dated

16.03.2023from3.drespondentforconstructionofstiltfor parking + three upper floors. According to the petitioner he has constructed the building strictly in accordance with the said building permit order. Thereafter, Sri A' Sharan Reddy approached him with a request to let out the said property for the purpose of running a hotel, banquet hall and rooms' Therefore, he approached respondent Nos'2 and 3 with a request to convert the said building from residential to commercial. He has also constructed two upper floors over and above the said three floors. The same is unauthorized construction. Therefore, he has requested 3'd respondent to grant permission for constrrrction upto two additional \ KL,J w.P No.Y64 of 2025 2 floors which is unauthorized construction. 3'd respondent directed the petitioner to lile an application for regularization of unauthorized construction after completion of the building and he will regularize the said unauthorized construction. Therefore, he has constructed the two additional floors.

3. The said Sri Sharan Reddy offered an amount of Rs.3,50,000 f - rent to the petitioner herein. Accordingly, tenant made huge expenditure of Rupees T\po Crores and he has provided a1i the facilities to the said building.

4. He has specifically pleaded the said facts in paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of the writ affidavit.

5. According to him, respondent Nos.2 and 3 tried to demolish the subject property without following due procedure laid down under law. Therefore, petitioner has filed W.P.No.4895 of 2025. This Court disposed of the said writ petition vide its order dated 19.02.2025, wherein the learned counsel for the petitioner therein sought permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with KI.J w.P.No.5464 of 202s 3 a liberty to challenge the final notice raising all the contentions and grounds which he raised in the writ petition, accordingly, liberfy was granted to the petitioner therein to challenge the final notice dated 1.2.02.2025.

6. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner during the hearing of the said writ petition that respondent Nos.2 and 3 informed this Court that they have already passed speaking order dated 12.02.2025 directing the petitioner to remove the said unauthorized construction. It is also the specific contention of the petitioner herein that the said final notice dated 12.O2.2025 was not served on the petitioner.. A copy of the same was furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner during the hearing in the said writ petition. 7, l,earned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is intending to prefer an appeal challenging the lrnal notice dated L2.O2.2O25 in terms of Section 252 (1) of the Telangana Municipatities Act, 2019 and he seeks I some protection for reasonable period. I{L,J w.P.No.5464 of 2025 4

8. Admittedly, final notice dated 12.O2.2025 is an appealable order. Appeai lies with Regional Direction who is the appellate authority concerned in terms of Section 252 (1) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019.

9. In the light of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition 1S disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal challenging the said final notice dated 12.02.2025 before the Regional Director, Appellate Authority concerned in terms of Section 252 (l) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2Ol9 within (10) days from today failing which liberty is granted to the 3.d respondent to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law. Subject to the result of the appeal, 3.d respondent shall take action against the petitioner herein in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to raise all the contentions and grounds which he has raised in the present writ petition before the appellate authority. I I KL,J w,P.No.5464 of 2025 5

10. However, as discussed supra, even according to the petitioner, 4th and Sth floors of the subject propert;r are unauthorized construction. Therefore, the petitioner cannot use the 4th and 5th floors of the subject propert5r for commercial purpose without obtaining permission from 3'd respondent and stilt for parking + 3 upper floors shciuld be used only for residential purpose. 1 1. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition 1S disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

12. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shal1 stand closed. ASS SD/.V.KAVITHA NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// cTto N OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration.and Urban Development Department, Secretariii Buildin!, Secretariat, Hyderabad'

2. The Commissioner, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

3. The Commissioner Nizampet Municipal Corporation, Nizampet, Medchal- Malkajgiri District,.

4. One CC to SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY SC FOR MAUD&MC [OPUC] 6.TwoCCstoGPFoRMCPLADMNURBANDEV,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana. [OUT]

7. Two CD CoPies KKS BSK I I HIGH COURT DATED:2410212025 CC TODAY I I ORDER WP.No.5434 of 2025 1 t{E S{Af €' e J o o \\",a 2 7 riB 2[75 c^,. rr. z C; -1. '/ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1)