High Court · 2025

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to give an appropriate writ order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of mandamus to the respondent no.2 by declaring in action of Respondent that not taking action against the respondent no.3 is violation of this court order and arso u nconstitutiona r and vioration of Articre 14, 16 and 30oA ot the constitution of rndia and consequenry direct the Respondent no 2 to demolish the Building of respondent no.3. I l I -- ---7 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 1 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated an the affidavit fired in support of the petition. the High court may be preased to direct the respondent no 2 to cancer the buirding permission of respondent no 3 and direct the Respondent no 2 to stop further conStiuction of building pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the petitioners: SRI POLAMPELLI RAJU counser for the Respondent No.1: cp Foi McpL'noruru a URBAN DEv COUNSEI fOr thc RESPONdENT NO.2: SRI PUTT'KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR counset for the Respondent Nos.3 f:"' " The Court made the following: ORDER ;r I I ! ..-_--------- HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.6811 of 2025 ORDER: Heard Sri Raju Polampelli, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Putta Iftishna Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.2. Perused the record.

2. According to the petitioners, fathers o[ a_11 petitioners and 4th respondent are siblings. There are disputes between petitioners and respondent Nos.3 with regard to house H.No.9-37 situated at 2"d respondent municipality. Petitioners filed suit vide O.S.No.O2 of 2025 agatnst respondent Nos.3 and 4 seeking perpetua_l injunction. The same is pending. There is no injunction order.

3. According to the petitioners, respondent Nos.4 and 5 have obtained building permit orders for construction of residential building and they are making complex to use for commercial purpose. They are proceeding with I t(L,J rl P No 6A11 of 2025 2 construction without leaving setbacks and in violation of Order dated 07.O2.2O25 rn W.p.No.3549 of 2025, during the pendency of O.S.No.O2 of 2O2S and by encroaching into the petitioners property. The said construction is Unauthorized construction. Therefore, they have submitted representation dated 2\.OI.2O2S to the 2,d respondent with a request to take action against respondent Nos.4 ald 5. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, 2nd respo4dent did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent No.2, petitioners filed the present writ petition.

4. Whereas, Sri putta Krishna Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for 2"d respondent on instructions would submit that 2nd respondent has already issued show cause notice dated 2g.O1 .2025 to respondent Nos.3 and 4. 2"d respondent will further take action against respondent Nos.3 and 4 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities KL,J w.P.No.68l I of2025 J Act, 2Ol9 and also directions issued by this Court vide ord.er dated 17.O2.2O25 in W'P'No'3549 of 2025 against respondent Nos.4 and 5. In the light of the said submissions notice to

5. respondent Nos.3 and 4 is dispensed with'

6. 3'd respondent has hled W'P'No'3549 of 2O25 to declare the action of 2nd respondent in trying to interfere with the construction activity being carried out by her over the subject property pursuant to building permit order dated 18-12.2024 issued by the then Gram Panchayat, Khanapur as illegal' The said writ petition carne up for hearing on 07 '02'2025' on which date' learned standing counsel appearing for 2nd respondent submitted to this Court that 2"d respondent has issued show cause notice to 4th respondent granting a weeks time to submit explanation' 2"d respondent will consider the said explanation and take action against the respondent No.4 in accordance with taw' Considering the I KL,J !t l) No 6Ul I of 2025 4 said submission, this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the 4th respondent to submit explanation within one week from thb said date and on receipt of the same, 2"d respondent shall consider the same and take action strictly in accordance with law within 4 weeks by putting 4th respondent and petitioners herein on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. Till then 2"d respondent was directed not to proceed further pursuant to show cause notice dated

28.01.2025. This court also riirected the 4th respondent to proceed with the construction strictly in accordance with building permit order dated 23.11.2024 and work commencement letter dated 18.12.2024 failing which liberty was granted to 2nd respondent to take action against 3.,1 respondent. This Court also clarified that if

3.d respondent fail to submit explanation within one week, liberty was a-lso granted to 2"a respondent to take action against 3.d respondent pursuant to show cause notice dated 28.0 1 .2025. (L,J W.P No.68l I ol2025

7. In the light of said submissions' this writ petition is disposed of directing 2'd respondent to consider the representation dated 27'Ol'2O25' take action against dent Nos.3 and 4 strictly in accordance with the respon procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 by putting the petitioners and respondent by affording them an Nos.3 and 4 on notice and respondent shail also opportunitY of hearing' 2"d consider the directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid order in W'P'No'3549 of 2025' Further' he shall complete ttre said exercise within a period of O4 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order' He shall also consider the explanation' if any' submitted by the4threspondenttotheshowcausenoticedated 28.01.2025. It is made clear that 2"d respondent shall not consider and adjudicate inter-se disputes between the petitioners and respondent Nos'3 and 4 with regard to the subject property in view of pendency of O'S'No'O2 of2025. I I 1 I L- '-.. \ KL,J lv P No.68l : of 2025 6

8. With rhe aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shal be no order as to costs. 9 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition sha_ll stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- A.,STIEENIVASA REDDY ASSII;TANT REGISTRAB SECTION OFFICER To

1. The Principal Secreta ry tMunicipal Administration a Department Secretari at Hyderabad, State of Telangana. 2. The Municipal Comm issioner. Khana pur Municipal 3. One CC to SRI PO LAMPELLI RAJU, Advocate IO PUCI 4. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV. High Courl for the State Urban development ity District Nirmal of Telan gana, at Hyderabad [OUT] One CC to SRI P Two CD Copies UTTA KRISHNA RE DDY, SC FOR TVPCL IOPUC] \

5. 6. I'SK, SS &rc- b r I L E F F I Et' I v i F I HIGH COURT DATED:0610312025 ORDER WP.No.6811 of 2025 r{E sTA r5 1 1zo t,'t' l;l l' 2 3 I{rrY 2[[ .t ^x isp,:.TC-\( 2 z o I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS }tlsuf