1. Mir Ahmed Khan v. The State of Telanagana

The Commissioner, GHMC, Having office at GHMC Office, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. The Zonal Commissioner, GHMC, South Zone, having office at Phool Bagh,Hyderabad The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC, South Zone, having office at Malakpet,Hyderabad Smt. M. Manjula, w/o Late M Laxman Rao, Aged about 54 years, Occ Housewife, R/o.H.No.16-2- 835162111 and 12, Karanbagh, Saidabad Colony, Hyderabad 59. ...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 appropriate writ order or direclions more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned building permission revocation order passed by the respondent No. 3 vide order NO. 1162/TPS/CHRZGHMC12025I2O2'| dt 2510212025 is highly illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, in violation of principles of natural justice and tainted with malafides and unconstitutional. Consequently, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with the construction work of the petitioners in respect of H.No. 16-2-75113111A (16-2-7511.3111A/1 New) and 16-2- 751141A11, totally admeasuring 471.00Sq yards situated at Karan Bagh, Saidabad, Hyderabad, unless in accordance with law. 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 Courr: may be pleased to suspend the operation of the orders passed by the respondent no. 3 vide order NO. 1 1 62/TPS/CH RZIG H M C I 2025 I 2021 dt 25 I O2t 2025. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI MOHAMMAD ADNAN Counsel for the Respondent No.l : GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for Respondent No.2to4:SRl RAPARATHI VENKATESH,SC FOR GHMC Counsel for Respondent No.S : -- The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN trRIT PETITION No.7113 OF 2025 ORAL ORDER: Heard Mr.Mohd. Adnan, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1 and Mr:Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

2. tt is the specific contention of the petitioners herein that respondent No.3 has no jurisdiction or power to pass the impugned revocation order dated 25.O2.2025. It is the Commissioner who is having power to revoke the building permit order.

3. Mr.Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 fairly submits that respondent No.3 has no jurisdiction to revoke t.le building perrnit order.

4. In the light of the said submission, the other grounds raised by the petitioners need not adverted to. \ \ \. 2

5. Section 7(lll of the Telangana Sta-te Building Permission Approval and Self Certiflrcation System (TS-bPASS) Act, 2O2O, deals with approval of building permissions. The same is relevant and is extracted as under: "The permission issued under deemed clause can be revoked by the commissioner within 2l days frorn tJ:e date of deemed approval if it is found ttrat deemed approval has been obtained by mis-representation of the facts or false statements, and/or against the building mles, regulations and Master Plan lald use provisions."

6. Section 450 of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, deals with the power of Commissioner to cancel permission on the ground of material misrepresentation by applicant. The same is relevant and is extracted as under: "l[ at any time aftcr permission to proceed with any buitding or work has been given, the Commissioner is satisfred that such permission rvas granted in consequence of any material misrepresentation or fraudulent statement contained in t1'e notice given or information fumished under section 428 or 433 or in ttre further infcrrmation if any, furnished, he may cancel such permission and any 3 I work done thereunder shall be deemed to have been done without his perrnission."

7. Rule 12(vii) of the Telangana State Building Permission Approval and Self-certifrcation System (TSbPASS) Rules, 202O (for short the Rules, 2O2O), says that the permission issued under deemed clause can be revoked by the Competent Authority within 21 days from the date of deemed approval without any notice, if it is found that deemed approval has been obtained by misrepresentation of the facts or false statements, and / or against the building rules, regulations and Master Plan land use provisions'

8. Rule 2(vi) of the Rules, 2020, deals with 'Competent Authority' which mearls the Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. g. In the light of the same, without going into the merits or demerits of the case, only on the said ground, the impugned revocation order dated 25.02.2025 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to respondent No'2 i.e., the Commissioner, GHMC, to initiate fresh action, in accordance with the 4 \ procedure laid down under the GHMC Act, 1955. He shall complete the said exercise within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to take all the grounds and contentions, which are raised in the present writ petition before respondent No.2. It is for respondent No.2 to consider the same.

10. Accordingly, this Writ petition is disposed of. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// sD/- L. VTJAYA LAXMT SSISTANT REGISTRAR '\.. SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Municipal iitate ot Ielanagana, Hyderabad. ministration, Secretariat 2' f.hg co.mrqissioner, GHMC, Having office at GHMC office, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

3. The Zonal Commissioner, GHMC, South Zone, having office at phool Bagh,Hyderabad

4. II,g Deputy Commissioner, GHMC, South Zone, having office at Malakpet,Hyderabad

5. One CC to SRt MOHAMMAD ADNAN, Advocate. tOpUCl 6' lwo ccs to GP FoR McpL ADMN URBAN DEV, High court for the State of Telangana. IOUT]

7. One CC to SRt RAPARATH| VENKATESH, SC FOR GH|\4C. IOPUCI B. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP F' HIGH COURT DATED:0710312025 ( 1r\E SrA r6: ( a o o 1r JUN [6 z D.r'.'nalgtr€ t ORDER WP.No.7113 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1\Ccl\i\q) fui,,