High Court · 2025

The Deputy Commissioner, Circle - lX, Abids, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. 3. Smt. D. Chandamma Wo lat H.No.'1 7-2-59514/4, Saidaba . Nagabhushanam, Occ Household, RYo yderabad. e.D d,H ...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 Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing Notice No. 403/88/TPS/C9/GHMC/2013, dated 23.12.2013 without considering the representation dated 16.12.2013 in proper perspective for regularizing the 2nd floor as per section 455 A of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and in violation of well settled principles of natural justice- l.A. NO:1 OF 2013tWPMP. NO 2 4i632 0F 20131 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the writ petition, the High court may be preased to stay all furlher proceedrngs pursuant to Notice No. 403/88/Tps/c9/GHMC/2013, daled 23.12.2013, pending disposal of the main Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI MOHD ISLAMUDDIN ANSARI 9g.yJls"l for the Respondents 1&2 : SRt G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.3: - _ - W.P.No.6 915 0F 2025 Between: C. Sumitra Bai, Wo. C Ashok, Kumar,.aged about 6g years, Housewife, R/o. H No l-8-40212, chikkadoarv., Hyoeraudol-reirJ.?nili'oy her G.p.A.Horder c. S/o Lare c Vaoai,pa,-Hvi"'"#i'iriitlin .r.rotjrized c.p.I*iltu"o ai["Jrbiil"' AND ...PETITIONER * 1 State of Telanqana. Reoresented by its principal Secretary (Department of Municipat Administration) T.S. Secretlariat, Hvo,iiJUil" Greater Hyderabad Municipal .Corporation (GHMC), Represented by its uommrssioner, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad '- "' -,' The Deputv commissioner, Greater ,Hyderabad Municipal corporation (GHMC) Circle 15, Musheerabad, HyOeraUa'A-.- The Assrstant Citv ptanner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) Circte 15, tvusrreerjbaO, HyOeiaOail- -- Bandaru Maheshwar. S/o late^Viswanadham, aged about 61 years, Business, R/o H No 1-8-3e6 ro 1_8_3s8, chiki;J;;iil Hv?1"rau,"rirl"' , * Bandaru Monica. W/o Bandaru Rt/o H.No 1-8_396 to 1_8_398, Cniki"opJilv,'nvf"Jr1"""d .[46l.tsshwar, aged about 54 years, Housewife, 2 3 4 5 6 *" ^ . ,..RESPONDENTS Petition under Arlicre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the inaction of the oFficiar Respondents in failure to take any action against the ill6gal construction made by the Respondents 5 and 6 herein in the premises bearing D.No.1-8-396 and 398, situated at Chikkadpally, Hyderabad as arbitrary, illegal, and in violation of principle of natural justice apart from contrary to law contemplated under Section 452 (1), a61 (1) and 455-AA and other provisions of GHMC Act with a consequential direction to remove the illegal and unauthorized construction made by the Respondents 5 and 6 herein in the premises bearing D.No. 1-8-396 and 398, situated at Chikkadpally, Hyderabad in the interest of .justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents 1to 4 herein to take steps forthwith, for removing/ demolishing the illegal and unauthorized construction made by the Respondents 5 and 6 herein in the premises bearing D.No.1-8-396 and 398, situated at Chikkadpally, Hyderabad in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner SRI SIVALENKA RAMA CHANDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for Respondent No.2,3&4:SRl G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY,SC FOR GHMC Counsel for Respondent No.5&6 : SRI MOHD ISLAMUDDIN ANSARI The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER IN THE HIGH COUI{'I-FOI( ]-HE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WI{IT P[TITI()N NOs.383]3 OI:2013 & 6915 OF 2025 DATE: 12.12.2025 \,V.P No.3B 313 of 2013: Between: Bandaru Mahcshn'ar s/ o. late Vishwanatham and another a rrd C rea ter t{yderatracl Nl u Ilit' i pa I Corprer;11i 611' rep.b)/ its bornmissi() rler, llYclerabad and tn'o others. Petitioners Respondents COMMON ORI)[R: W.I,.No.38313 of 2073 is file't1 to cieclare thc. action of the 2"a respondent irr issuing Notice No.403/88/ I'15/C9/GHMC/2073, datcd, 23.12.2Q]l $,ithOut consiclcring tl-re representation dated

76.72.2013 rrr prop(.r' l)crsPL.cLivc l-or rcgularizing th(- 2nd iloor as per Section 455-4. of thc (,r'c'a tc'r Llvderabad Municipat Corporation Act, 1955, as arbih-arr,, illcr;al, corrtrarl'to the provisions of the saici Act, 1955 a.cl in violatron ol u,e ll scttlcd principlcs of rratural justice ..."

2. W.p.No.6915 of 2025 is filed to declare {.he inaction of the official rcsponclcrl[s i11 l'rilurc to takc anv actiorr agait-tst the illegal construction made by the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 herein in the premises bearing D.No.1-8-396 and 398, situated at Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, as arbitrary, illcgal .rnd in violation of principle of natural justice apart from contrary to law corrtemplated under Sections 452(1),461(1) and 455-AA and orher provisions of GHMC Act, with a consequential direction to remove the illegal an<1 unauthorized construction made bv thc Rcspondents 5 and 6 herein in the premises bearing D.No.1-8-396 arrd 398 situated at Chikkadpaltv, Hyderabad

3. Heard Mr. Mohd. Islamuddin Ansari, Iearned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.38313 of 2013 and respondent Nos.5 & 6 in W.P.No.6915 of 2025; Mr. Sivalenka Rarna Chandra Prasad, lcarned counsel for petitioner in W.1'].No.6915 of 2025; Mr. C.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC in both the writ petitions

4. Since the subject property involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, both writ petitions are taken up for hearing together and are disposcd of by this common order.

5. The case of the petitioners in W.P.No.38313 of 2013 is that, the house bearing Municipal No.1-8-396 to 398, admeasuring 201 square yards, situatcd at Cl-rikkadpally, Flyderabad is their ancestral ProPL5rtv and the saici prope rtli came ir-rt1 their share by virtue of partition c'lt'etJ 'ict: clocurnent No. l34ti oi i990, datecl 18.06..l990 ancl sincr-. thc.n the_r, art, in peaceful possession of the property. While so, Lrt the. behest oI aunt oI pttjtioner No.l, bv rramc, D.Chanc]amma, the 2,'d responcle^t hcr.in issuc.d;r shon,-cause noticc, clatecl 16.12.2011 under Sections a52(l) & 4610) of the GHMC Act, 1955 alleging that pt'titioners havL'clcviatccl lrom thc sanctionccl plan antl constructed 2nd floor o. the permitted grounrl + first floor and directed them to sho* sufficient caust'withirr 7 clays from the datc of receipt of the sairl .otir:c, to *,hich thev ha'c submitk:cl crpla.ation dated

27.01.2072 stating that thev obtaiued permission for grouncl + first fl.or, howl-r.er, 2,,c1 (loor v'as Lotlstructe(l to meet the family re.cluirr'mt nt antl tha: tltt:r, Itar'c bccr-r pa1,ir11,, propertv Lar rt,ithout an' default and are rvilling to regularize the unauthorized 2nd floor in accolclance w,iLh larr,.

6. lt is a'r,rrt'd th.rt *,hilc s., [).(]ha.darnma filed \&.lr.No.34l35 of 2011 sceking demolition ol unauthorized floor on subject property and thc said r,r'rit p.tition *,as .lismissed by the learned singlc Judge of this Court',r'hire rcr'orcri.g the staterncnt of the learned standing A Counsel for respondent-corporation that pctitioners have not made any construction. Aggrievcd llrereby, said Chandamma filed W.A.No.1167 of 201,2 and the same was disposed of vide judgmenr dated 23.01.2013, with a directior.r to thc petitioners to file an undertaking to the effect thai they will not rnake any construction on the subject property. Once again, said Chandaruna filed another W.P.No.19365 of 2013 seeking sin-rilar rclief, which is pending consideration by this Court. Two years l-licreafier, 2,,d respondent issued another notice dated 09.L2.2013 under Section 452(2) of the Act, stating that replv dated 27.07.2012 subrnitteil by the petitioners is not satisfied and not considered and herrctt rcjcctcd

7. It is further averred that petitiorrers have submitted a representation dated 16.12.2013 to the 2nd rcsp()rldcnt requesting to regularize the 2nd floor under Section 455-4 of the Act along with a Demand Draft of Rs.25,000/- for the pur.posc of processing the application. However, the 2nd resporrdent l-rerein issued impugned notice dated 23.72.2013 under Section 636 of the Act, rejecting the representation of the petitioners dated 16.72.2013 and directed the petitioners to remove the 2"d floor within 24 hours, failing which the same will be removed by the respondent, which is arbitrary, illegal, ) in violatior-r of rr'ell scttlecl prir-rciples of uatural justice and contrary to the provisions of thc Act 8 'l ht'Lrasir'(lri('\,ancL. ol the n,rit pctitioncr irr W.l).No.383 l3 of 2i)13 is that, tlcsPiic, r'ntr ki.g, a. application under Section 455_4 of thc Act, the oflit ial rcspondents without proper appreciation and opportunitY ha'e rojectcd their case for regularization. per contrn, the un.fficial resp,.tie.ts a.d writ petitior-rers in w.p.No.6975 of 2024 sought a clir.cti.r' lor demolishing the unauthorized floor and this Court, at irrst inst.rnce, grar.rted interim stav in w.p No.3g313 of 2013 anr{ thc sa.re is srLrsisting.s on t.c'lay. o. a perusa[, section 455-4 o[ the CI IMC ,\ct, 1955 envisages for regularization of the unarrth.rrzccl ll..;' b' colk-.cti.g, appropriate pe.nalty. The said pro l'isior r rt'trds.ts ttnclcr "section 455A. Regularisation of Buildings constructed without sanctioned plar.r - fhr,( omnrissilrrcr. ntav regular,isr: corlstru(.tions madc w,itl.rout o[.rtarning sanctiont,tl plan, subjoct to tullilling tht following conrl itior.rs - (,r) strbmissrorr ot btrildinll plans to thc compctL.nt authority duly paying.rll..rtc[]()ries ol fet, anr.l chargcs; (b) the c.nstructio^ sha lre subject to trrc condition that arl paran'tetr.ls laitl dox,n in lclcvant statutL.s, Master plan, Zonal Dt,r,t,lopmcnt l,la;r, l3uildir.rg ts1,e-laws, Buitding Rules ar_rd other 6 L relevant Government Orders including 'I elangana Firc Service Act, 1999 (Act No.15 of 1999) and the Narional Builcting Code are satisfied; (c) pavment of perraltv r.quivalcnt to thirtl, thr.r,c p1,r1-1111 (3392") of thc various categol ic.s o[ fccs anr{ ch.irgcs par,.alrl1, br thc applicant for obtaining building per.mission in addition to thc regular fee and other charges payable." 9 When once an application is rnadc undor tltc said provision, the respondents are duty-bourld to conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders by afforcling arl opportunity by conducting an enquiry and that being so, they canrrot sirlph,rciet.t said application without any opportunity and without proper rcasons. 10 That in view of the sarne, thc irnpugnc'd notice dated 23.'12.2013 in rejecting the appltcatior.r filed urrclcr Scction.155-,\ of the Act for regularization and the unauthorized floor, is bereft of any valid reasons and hence, set asidc and the respondents are directed to consider the application datcd 16.12.2013 of the vr,rit petitioners in W.P.No.38313 of 2013 filed for regularization under Section 455-4 of the GHMC Act afresh by affording arl opportunitl, to the petitioners by following due procedure of law, pursuani to which they are at liberfy to take action basing on the representation of the writ petitioner in W.P.No.69'15 of 2025. I 11 Subject to the abovc dilections and observations, both the Writ Petitions are ;rct.ortiirrglr rlisl-rost:d of

12. I hcrc sha ll bc' no orclcr as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, i[ anr', sl-rall starnd closcd To, //TRUE COPY// SDI L.VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,/ / r)- l./ SECTION OFFICER

1. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner, Circle - lX, Abids, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.

3. The Principal Secretary (Department of Municipal Administration) T.S. Secretariat, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

4. The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) Circle 15, Ivlusheerabad, Hyderabad.

5. The Assistant City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) Circle 15, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 6 One CC to SRI MOHD ISLAMUDDIN ANSARI, Advocate. [OPUC] 7 One CC to SRI SIVALENKA RAMA CHANDRA PRASAD, Advocate. [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

9. One CC to SRI G IVADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC. [OPUC] 10. Two CD Copies. BSK PIVIK HIGH COURT DATED:1 211212025 1 ta\ r'A \i.'9.. .* t( R iHE S t4 2 4 irtq )0?F t I C) t ^D tr:i COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.38313 of 2013 & 691S OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTONS WITHOUT COSTS *4 ? tb