Atluri _Chandrashekar v. Qtgtg 9f Telangana

M/S. Candeur Developers and Builders, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Mr. Srikar Re.{dy Katam Reddy S/o. Krishna RedOy.-X, having its iegd. ofiice at Flat No. 402,Kamala Auruh Apartment, Plot Nir. 9, HudaEnclavS, Road No. 70, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-500033. ..,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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDATVUS declaring inaction on the part of respondent no. 2 on petitioners representation dated 23.12.2024 submitted for prevention of illegal construction being undertaken by the 4th respondent in deviation of approved plan sanctioned by 2nd respondent vide permit no. 1lC20lOO3O9l2O22 daled 06.04.2022 for construction only in land admeasuring Ac. 5.20 guntas in Survey Nos. 104, 106, and 10711 of Serilingampally Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and to remove already constructed portions in the land of petitioner in survey no. 10911 of Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal, irregular, irrationaJ and amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred on respondents under the provisions of GHlr/C Act, 1955 and offends Articler '14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequenly direct the respondent nc. 2 to remove unauthorized construction mader in the land of petitioner in survey no. 109/1 situated at Kondapur Village, serilingampalle Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and see that the building is constructed as per sanction plan. 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 to initiate immediate action against the ,4th respondent for prevention of construction contrary to sanction plan issued by the 2nd respondent by removing unauthorized portion of building constructed in the petitioner's land in survey no. '109/1 situated at Kondapur Village, serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the Writ petitiorr. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.TARAK ABHILASH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel forthe Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER i i i l I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No. 6 a2a of2O25 ORDER: Heard Sri M. Tarak Abhilash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G' Madhusudhan Reddy' learned standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos'2 and 3' Perused the record.

2. Petitioner is claiming that he is absolute owner and possessor of lald admeasuring Ac'33'18 guntas in d.ifferent survey numbers situated at Kondapur Village' Serilingampalle Mandal, Ranga Reddy District on the strength of a final decree dated' 24't2'1969 in O'S'No'62 of 1963 passed by the learned Munisiff Magistrate' West' Hyderabad. 4th respondent obtained the building permit order dated 16.04.2022 and proceeding with the constmction in the property belonging to the petitioner' Therefore, he has submitted a representation dated 21.12.2024 to 3'd respondent with a request to take action against 4th respondent' Despite receiving and KL,J v! P.No.682a ol2O25 2 acknowlectging the said representation, 3.d respondent did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of 3.d respondent, petitioner filed the present r.vrit petition. In proof of the same petitioner has filed photographs.

3. As discussed supra, except filing of cop1. of hnal decree dated 24.12.1969 in O.S.No.62 of 1963 of'Munisiff Magistrate, West, Hyderabad, petitioner herein has not hled any document to show that he is ovi,ner and possessor of subject property. The said suit was hled by the petitioner's father i.e., Kadiyala Venkata Subba Rao. Petitioner is claiming that he is the daughter,s son of defendant No.1 in the said suit. Even then, he has submitted a representation dated 21.12.2024 contending that 4th respondent is proceeding with constructi<tn in his larrd. Therefore, this is an inter-se dispute. 3.d respondent calnot consider. If 4rh respondent is proceeding with construction in the land belonging to the petitioner, he has to approach competent civil Court but, \ l i I , r I ) t I 3 KL,J w-P.No 6828 of2025 he cannot submit representation to 3'd respondent with a request to take action against 4th respondent and frle the present writ petition alleging non-consideration of the said representation. However, in the' representation I d'ated2l.t2.2o24,ifpetitionermadeaspecilrcallegation that4threspondentisproceedingwithconstructionin deviation to the building permit order dated 06'04'2022' the said aspect 3'd respondent will consider' 0

4. In the light of said submission' notice to 4tt1 respondent is disPensed with'

5. This writ petition is disposed of directing the 3'd respondent to inspect the site and if the allegations made by the petitioner are found to be correct he shall take action against 4fr respondent strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 by putting the 4u, respondent on notice and affording him an opportunity of hearing. He shall complete the said exercise within a KL,J ir' P.No.6828 of 2025 4 period of (04) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. With the aforesajd direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

7. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any. pending in the Writ Petition sha_ll stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. T.VIJAY KUMAR DERUTY RE ^.ir* GISTRAR OFFICER \irL' To, 1 The Principal to Government, Municipar Ad#nistration and Urban -Secretary ueveropment Department, Secretariat, Saifabad. Hyderabad. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. Lt q Qepyly Commissioner,. Circle-19, Serlingarnpally Zone, Greater Hyderabad [\,4unicipal Corporation. 2 5

4. One CC to SRI M.TARAK ABHILASH, Advocate [OpUC] 5. One CC to SRI G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC tOpUCl 6. Two ccs to GP FoR rvcP^L ADMN URBAN DEV, High courl for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD Copies BSR % I I I I I HIGH COURT DATED:06 tO3t2O2S CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.6828 of 2O2S $t- '( )A q o u T, J': t 2 6 \qr$ W5 * D;-.1-t t '.'. f DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS )B d,r j l I