High Court · 2025

Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, S*rrf,, Jayanthi Complex, Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, Srinivas Nagar, Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500038 The Metropolitan Commissioner, Director Planning l, Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Swarna Jayanthi Complex, Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, Srinivas Nagar, M/s. Akshara Constructions, Rep. by PVSN Raju, S/o. PR Mohan Raju, Aged about 58 yrs., Occ. Business, Oflice at. Villa No.25, Aparna Orchids, lzath Nagar, Madhapur, Hyderabad - 500081 M/s. Pardha Constructions, Rep by its Managing Partner, PVSN Raju, S/o. PR Mohan Raju, Aged about 58 yrs., Occ. Business, Office D.No.1-98/90/35, ln plot No.4/A, Madhapur, Hyderabad _ s00081. ...RES'.NDENTS 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 Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of respondents more particularly 2nd and 3rd respondents herein in not considering the written submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners herein daled 18-07 -2024 against notice dated 10-07- 2024 issued by the 3rd Respondent which is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 to hear the matter expeditiously by considering the written submissions submitted by the petitioners through their counsel dated 18-07-2024 besides directing them not to accord any permission to the respondent No.4 and 5 herein or their agents without any notices to the petitioners herein or their counsel by cancelling the permission if any already granted to the 4th and 5th respondents. 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.2 and 3 to consider the written submissions made by the petitioners through their counsel daled 18-07-2024 against notice dt.10.07.2024 of 3rd respondent pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI KRISHNA MURTHY DEVARAKONDA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: M/s. D.MADHAVI, SC FOR HMDA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: -- I The Court made the following: ORDER H HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITI ON No.5680 of 2ol25. ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Mrs. D. Madhavi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. perrrsed the record. t

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 Nos.4 and 5.

3. Petitioners have frled a writ petition vide W.P.No.3329 of 2O2l to declare the action of bundigal Municipalier in not taking any action in respect of changing the nature of the property and raising illegal construction by respondent Nos.6 to 16 therein including / W.P.No.5680 of 202 2 respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein as illegal. This Court vide order, dated 10.02.2021 directed the competent authority to consider the complaints i.e., 3I.lO.2O2O and 28.12.2O2O and if the allegations made by the petitioners are found to be true, the official respondents shall take necessa-ry action strictly in accordance with law. This Court also clarified that before taking any such action, parties sha_lt be put on notice and afforded" an opportunity of hearing.

4. In compliance with the said order, resp,fndent No.3 has issued notice, dated 10.07.2024 to the petitioners herein with a request to submit art the relevant documents including location sketch and orders in O.S.No.428 of 2022. Seven (7) days time was granted to the petitioners. petitioners have submitted an explanation on 18.02.2024 atong with all the relevant documents. The same was not considered by respondent No'3. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent No.3, petitioners frled the present writ petition. / 'l KL,J W.P.No.5680 of 2025 3

5. Mrs. D. Madhavi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, on instructions, would submit thpt respondent No.3 will consider the written statements/explanation, dated 18.O7.2024 submitted by the petitioners to the notice, dated LO.O7.2O24 and take action against respondent Nos.4 and 5 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 20O8 (for short the Act, 2O08J by putting the petitioners and respondent Nos.4 and 5 on notice and I affording them an opportunity of hearing.

6. As discussed supra, petitioners herein have filed a suit vide O.S.No.428 of 2022 against respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein are also parties to the O.S.No.428 of 2022 for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The said suit is pending and there is no interim order. Interlocutory application filed by the petitioners is also pending. It is the specihc grievance of the petitioners W.P.No.5680 of 2025 K 4 herein that respondent Nos.4 and 5 are proceeding with the construction without obtaining prior permission from respondent Nos.2 and 3 ald the same is unauthorized construction. Despite submission of representation, dated 18.07.2024, stating so, respondent No.3 is not taking any action against respondent Nos.4 and 5.

7. In the light of the said submissions made by learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2.and 3 t.I.at before taking any action against respondent Nos.4 and 5 respondent No.3 will put the petftioners and respondent Nos.4 ald 5 on notice and afforcling them an opportunier of hearing.

8. In the light of the above, this Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to consider the written statements/explalation, dated submitted by the petitioners to the notice, dated 10.07.2024.If the allegations made by the petitioners are found to be correct, respondent No.3 sha.ll take action L8.O7.2024 KL,J W.P.No.5680 of 2025 5 against respondent Nos.4 and 5 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Act, 2008 by putting the petitioners and respondent Nos.4 and 5 on notice and affording them arr opportunity of hearing. However, respondent No.3 is directed not to consider the disputes between the petitioners and respondent Nos.4 and 5 with regard to the subject property more particularly suit schedule property in O.S.No.428 of

2022. He shall conhne enquiry on the allegations made by the petitioners that respondent Nos.4 ,nd 5 are proceeding with the construction w'ithout any permission. However, he shall complete the said exercise within a period four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. SD/- P.PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTON OFFICER To

1. The Principal Secretary to Government Municipal Administration and Urban Developmbnt Departm-ent, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Te,langana' 2. The Hy'derabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Swarna ! gVanttti Complex, Sanjeeva Rbddy Nagar, Srinivas Nagar, Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500038

3. The Metropolitan Commissioner, Director Planning l, Hyderabad Metropolitan Developmbnt Authority, Swarna Jayanthi Complex, Sanieeva Reddy Nagar' Srinivas Nagar, .T 4 5 6 PSK. PSK a

7. trtri',ffi.?lffi i1xfr}iiotrHs:fi ;:::::T:::," I HIGH COURT DATED:2 510212025 ORDER WP.No.5680 of 2025 0 t I ( r{ ,s 11 ilAR ztfr t )- I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \D $)