Mir Mustafa AIi Khan v. 1. The State of Telangana

No.3, Ashok Nag-ar, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Managiflg Partner, Mr.B.V.Satish' ...RESPONDENTS 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 appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the official respondents in not taking any action on the representation of the petitioner dated 13'08-2024 seeking cancellatircn and revocation of building permission dated 25-06-2022 vide Pemiit No.1/C'16/0038812O22 on the File No.1/HO/07619/2021 issued by respondent No.2 in favour of Fespendents No.7 ts 11 for building € Compbx at +l-Alos.3=s- 143/8 & 3-5-1211E1116, on Plot No.1, King Koti, Hyderabad on misrepresentation of built up area by respondents No.7 to 11 by illegal{y including the common passage way in the built up area and thereby illegally occupying the same and constructing in the said common passage way, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstifutional and. in violation of Articles, 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of lndia and also against the provisions of GHMC Acts and Rules and consequently direct the respondents more particularly the official respondents to take action forthwith on the representation dated 13-08-2024 and 2811212024 vide correspondence No.789751/2024lCtNWRD3(HO), including canc,elling and revoking the building permission dated 2546-2022 vide- Permit No.1/C16/0038812O22 on the File No. 1/HO/07619/2021 issued by respondent No.2 ro.fa, sur of -respondents No-7 to 11 for building a Complex at H-Nos.3.S= 1431B & 3-5-1211E1116, on Plot No.1, King Koti, Hyderabad which was based on misrepresentation of built up area by respon(ents No.7 to 11 and take action as per due procedure established by law. [A 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 stay the itlegal construction carried on by the respondents No.7 to 11 herein by overlapping into the portion of the petitioner's property including the 60 sq. feet room and the common pathway, in pursuant to the fraudulently obtained building permission dated 25-06-2022 vide Permit No. 1lC16lOO3BBl2O22 on the File No.1/H0/07619/2021 issued by respondent No.2 in favour of respondents No.7 to 11 for building a Complex at H.Nos,3-5-1 43lB & 3'5-1211E1116, on Pkct No.1' King Koti, Hyderabad, pending disposal of this writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI YEMMIGANUR SOMA SRINATH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 6: SRI M. ARUN KUMAR, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.7 to 11: ---- The Court made the following: ORDER THE IIONOT'RABLE SRI JUSTICE K. I"AIGHMAN WRIT PETITION No.6OO2 OF 2o25 ORDER: Heard Sri Y.Soma Srinath Reddy, learned corlnsel for tJle petitioner and Sri Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 6.

2. Petitioner is claiming that he is ttre joint owner and possessor of H.No.3-5-143 and 143,4., situated at Azarn Manzil, King Kothi, Hyderabad. He is presently residing in the said property. Respondent Nos.7 to 11 are making construction in the said property. They have obtained building permit orders from GHMC and they are making construction without leaving the necessar5r setbacks and boundaries being provided for and without adhering to the Rules. The same is unauthorized construction. Therefore, petitioner has submitted a representation dated 13.08.2024 to the 2"d respondent with a request to take action against respondent Nos.7 to I 1. Despite receiving and t acknowledging the said representation, 2'd respondent did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by tJle said inaction of 2"d respondent, petitioner flled the present writ petition.

3. Whereas Sri Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 6, on instructions, would submit that 4*. respondent will consider the representati,on dated I3.O8.2O24, inspect the site and if the allegation made by the petitioner is found to be correct, accordance with the procedure laid down under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short 'the GHMC Act') by putting the petitioner and respondent Nos.7 to I 1 on noLice and allording them an opportunity of hearing.

4. According to the petitioner, respondent Nos.7 to 11 are making construction by encroaching into his property. He has stated so in the representation dated

13.04.2024 and writ alfrdavit. Therefore, he sought a direction to 2nd respondent to consider the said representation and take action against respondent Nos.7 to

11. 3

5. Respondent Nos.7 to 11 have obtained building permit orders under Telangana State Building Permission Approval and Self Certification System (TS-bPASS) Act, 2O2O by uploading all relevant documents by way of self-certification and self-declaration. Respondent Nos.2 to 6 will consider only the following aspects: (i) Misrepresentation/suppression of facts. (ii) False statement, if any, made by respondent Nos.7 to 11. (iii) Deviation in construction to the building permit orders.

6. It is not the case of the petitioner herein that respondent Nos.7 to 11 obtained the aforesaid building permit orders by way of misrepresentation and suppression of facts. It is the contention of the petitioner herein that respondent Nos.7 to 11 are making construction in his property and without leaving setbacks. Respondent authorities will not consider the inter se disputes. They will consider only the aforesaid three aspects. If there is deviation in construction and ttrat respondent Nos.7 to 1 I are proceeding with the construction without leaving 1 setbacks, respondent ai.rtfrorities will take action against respondent Nos.7 to I l. 7 . In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing 4th respondent to consider the representation dated 13.Oa.2O24, inspect the site ald if the allegation made by the petitioner that respondent Nos.7 to I 1 are proceeding with construction without leaving shall take action against respondent Nos.7 to 11 strictly in accordance with the procedrJre laid down under ttre GHMC Act by putting the petitioner and respondent Nos.7 to 11 on notice and aJfdrding them an opportunity of hearing. However, it is made clear that 4ft respondent shaLl not consider the disputes between petitioner and respondent Nos.7 to 11. He shall conhne his enquiry and action only to the allegation made by the petitioner that respondent Nos.7 to I 1 are proceeding with construction without leaving necessary setbacks in terms of building permit orders. However, he shall complete the said exercise within a period I To, of four (O4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall tre no order as to costs. SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1 . The Principal Secretary, lvlunicipal Administrati The State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderaba 2. The Commissioner, The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tankbund rban Development, ndU Road, Hyderabad.

3. The Town Planning Officer, Circle 14 - Goshamahal, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.

4. The City Planner, Circle 14 - Goshamahal. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.

5. The Town Planning Officer, Circle 16 - Amberpet, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad- Corporatiori, Hyderabad

6. The City Planner, Circle 16 - Amberpet, Greater Hyderabad Municipal 7. One CC to SRI YEMMIGANUR SOMA SRINATH REDDY, Advocate TOPUCI B. One CC to SRI M. ARUN KUMAR, SC for GHMC [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] (Annex a copy of the order dated 11.10.2022 passed inWP. No.1539 of 2014)

10.Two CD Copies BN GJP ?p. HIGH COURT DATED:2810212025 WP.No.6002 of 2025 ( oR 1HE S )^4 (_) 17 JUN M + o .t' .,/,/ o DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS u FA- 2\ \-5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SIIAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAM'.VARAPU RAJESITWAR RAO Writ Petition No.1539 of 2Ol4 ORDER : (Per Hon'ble Justice Abhinand Kumar Sho.uili) When tl"e matter is taken up for hearing, Iearned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the petitioners, has fairly conceded that the issue raised in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by a judgment rendered by this Honble Court in Writ Petition No.3546O of 2Ol3 and batch, dated 08.06.2O18 and that the present Writ Petition is also liable to be dismissed.

2. A learned Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in Writ Petition No.35460 of 2O13 ald batch, dated 08.O6.2O18 has held as under : 'On the above analgsis, the Wit Pettions are dismissed but subject to the follouing conditions :

1. The fust respondents-o.pplicants in all these cases shall be subkcted. to a phgsical test to o.scetto;in their fitness before behg reinducted in seruice as Home Guard.s. An objecttue and transryrent procedure shall be adopted bg tle State and. its police olficiak in this regard and aLl deseruing candid.ates shall agatn be enrolled on th-e rolLs of tte Home Guards Organization-

2. Enrollment of such deseruing candidates shall, Ltoweuer, not haue *te elfect of confening upon them 2 AKS,-,, & RRN,J wp_!5lg_2o14 the benefi.t of cnntinuitg of service, senioritg, arrears of pag etc. for all purposes- Their enrolment utould. be on par u it h fre s h ap pointme nt s. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if ang, shatt also stand dismissed. No order as ao cosls. "

3. This Court, having considered the submissions of the learned Government pleader for Services_I, appearing for the petitioners, is of the considered view that since similar issue which was raised in. the present Writ petition has akeady been adjudicated by this Honble Court vide Writ petition No.35460 of 2Ot3 and batch, dated 08.06.201g; therefore, following the present Writ Petition is also dismissed as above. No costs

4. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. ABHINAND KTIMAR SIIAVILI, J e NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J Date: ll.lO.2O22 Note :: Office is direct to annex copy of the order passed in Writ Petition No.3S46O of 20 l3 and batch, dated 08.06.2018 ro rhis lile. Ndr / Tmk