High Court · 2025
Case Details
4. Sri Chandra Avenues Private Limited, Having registered office at 203, Jayabharathi Apartments, Suchitra X roads, Jeedimetla Village, Qutubullapur [\rlandal, Hyderaba, represented by its Managing Partner Smt. Suryaneni Chandrakala W/o. Thirumal Rao, Age 41 years, Rio Flat No.19, Little Hearts Godavari Homes, Vennelagadda, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad.
5. Maramganti Sudershan Reddy, S/o. M. Narsimha Reddy, Age 62 years, Occ Business, R/o. H.No.6-3-39/4, Prem Nagar, Beside Sai Baba Temple, Khairtabad, Hyderabad.
6. Hari Krishna Ledala, S/o. Satyanarayana Ledala, Age 36 years, Occ Business, R:/o. H.No.16-7-214, Dayanand Colony, Warangal District.
7. Jupally Tirupathy Rao, S/o. Jupally Venkata Rama Rao, Age 48 years, Occ Business, RL/o. H.No.l-5-1074111403, Father Balaiah Nagar, Near Reliance Fresh, Old Alwal, Secunderabad.
8. fttl. Shyam Reddy, S/o. M. Venkat Reddy, Age 48 years, Occ Business, R/o. Plot No.57lA, Sri Nagar Colony, Kapra, ECIL, Hyderabad.
9. Y. Prashanthi, Wo. Srinivas, Age 31 years, Occ House wife, Rl/o. Plot No.23, KR Nagar, Chinna Thokatta, New Bowenpally, Secunderabad.
10.K, Ravinder, S/o. Ramulu, Age 44 years, Occ Business, Ri/o. Block No.30, Plot No.14, Ramraj Nagar, Suchitra, Jeedimetla Village, Qutubullapur Mandal, R.R. District. 1 1 . D. Shyamala, W/o. Ch. Hanmandlu, Age 36 years, Occ Government employee, H.No. l 1 -9/147lA, Birkur Village and Mandal, Nizamabad District. AND 1 The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, to the Municipal Administration, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. ...PETITIONERS i //
2. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, represented by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Quthubullapur Mandal, Circle 15, Ranga Reddy District.
4. M/s. Ranga Builders & Contracting Company rep. by its, Managing Partner M. Raja Sekhar Reddy S/o. late Ranga Reddy, Rl/o. Villa No.115, Splendid Apama Palm lvleadows, Kompally, Hyderabad R4 is impleaded as per C.O. dt. 27-9-'16 in WPMP 29780 of 16 ...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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the notices issued under section 452 (2) of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, dated 20-6-2016, without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioners no.1 to B, dated '16-6-2016 to the notices, dated 6-6-2016, which were served on'1 5-6-2016, and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, now proposing to demolish the compound wall and but rooms constructed in and around the plots of the petitioners, which are in temporary and which were constructed to protect the plots of the lands i.e. in plot nos. 138/Part in sy.nos. 6 of the petitioner no.1, plot no..1 3B/Part in sy.no.6 of the petitioner no.2, plot no.138/Part (middle portion) of the petitioner no.3, plot no.139 and 140lPad in sy.no.31 and 32 of petitioner no-4, plot no.138/Part (north west part) in sy.no.6 of the petitioner no.5, in plot no.140/Part in sy.no.31 and 32 of the petitioner no.6, plot no.138/Part in sy.nos. 3,4 and 32 of the petitioner no.7, in plot no.138/Part in sy.no.6 and 228lPar1 in sy.no.32 and 33 of the petitioner no.8, in plot no.131/Part in sy.no.31 and 32 of the petitioner no.9, in plot no.142lPart (North side portion) and plot no.141/Part (south side portion) in sy.nos.31 and 32 of the petitioner no.10 and the plot no.14311 in sy.nos. 31 and 32 of the petitioner no.'t 1, all the said plots are situated at Petbasheerabad village, Qutubullapur Mandal of Ranga Reddy District, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural 1ustice and also violative of Articles 14, 19,21 and 300-A of the constitution of lndia and also against the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. Consequently, direct the respondents not to demolish the compound walls and but rooms constructed in the plots of the lands of the petitioners. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 24778 OF 2016) 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 respondehts not to demolish the compound walls and hut rooms constructed which are in temporary in nature in and around the plots of the petitioners no.'l to 1"1 i.e. in plot nos. 138/Part in sy.nos. 6 of the petitioner no.1, plot no.1 38/Part in sy.no.6 of the petitioner no.2, plot no.1 38/Part (midge portion) of the petitioner no.3, plot no.139 and 140/Part in sy.no.31 and 32 of petitioner no.4, plot no.138/Part (north west part) in sy.no.6 of the petitioner no.5, in plot no,140iPart in sy.no.31 and 32 of the petitioner no.6, plot no.138/Part in sy.nos. 3,4 and 32 of the petitioner no.7, in plot no.l38iPart in sy.no.6 and 228lPai in sy.no.32 and 33 of the petitioner no.8, in plot no..131/Part in sy.no.31 and 32 of the petitioner no.9, in plot no.142lPart (North side portion) and plot no.141lPart (south side portion) in sy.nos.3'l and 32 of the petitioner no.1 0 and the plot no.14311 in sy.nos- 31 and 32 of the petitioner no.11, all the said plots are situated at Petbasheerabad village, Qutubullapur Mandal of Ranga Reddy District. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.SAI KRISHNA, REP. FOR SRI K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI K.RAVI MAHENDER, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI D.BHASKAR REODY The Court made the following: ORDER 7', HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARA.YANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.2O191 of 2OL6 ORDER: This writ petition is Iiled seeking following relief: "To declore the notices issued under section 452 (2) of Hgderabad Municipal Corporation Act dated 20.6.2016 uithout consideing tLLe explanotion submitled. bg tlrc petitioners no.l to 8 doted 16.6.2016 to the ratices dated 6.6.2016 tuhich were serued on 15.6.2016 and uittaut giuing ang opportunitA of Learing to the petitioners notu proposing to demolish the compound wall and htt rooms constructed in and around ttLe plots of the petitbners, situated at Petbasheerabad uillage, Qutubullopur Manda| Ranga Reddg Distict, as iltegal and arbitrary."
2. Sri A. Sai Krishna, learned counsel representing Sri K. Venumadhav, learned counsel for the petitioners on record and Sri K. Ravi Mahender, learned Standing counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 are present.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that cause in the present Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication ar-rd it has become infructuous.
4. Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Misccllaneous pe titions pe nding, if any, shall stand closed. To, SD/. M.JAWAHAR REDDY SISTANT REGIS --L- //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. )
4. 5 One CC to SRI K.VENUMADHAV, Advocate IOPU) One CC to SRI D.BHASKAR REDDY, Advocate One CC to SRI K.RAVI MAHENDER, SC FOR GHMC [OPUC] Two CCs to Gp FoR lvtcplADI/N & URBAN DEV, High court for.the state of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Conies HIGH COURT DATED:2811012025 ORDER WP.No.20191 of 2016 SIAIE HE1 o o ,| 3 ttB 2o2E I o I PAT DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS, WITHOUT COSTS 3\il/"