Mohd Abdul Wadood v. 't. The State of Telangana

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.JAMALI MOHD.KALEEM Ul HAQUE Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI M.ARUN KUMAR, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDEABAD HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.37562 of 2OL4 DATE: LO.12.2O25 Betrree n: Mohd Abdul Wadood ...Petitioner AND 'l'he Statc of 1i:langzrr-ra, Rcp. b,r, its Principal Sccrctarr. Mr-rr-ricipal Administration and Urban Dcvelopment I)cpartment, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others ...Responde nts ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking following relief: is.suinq the "'l\t declare the actiort of Lhe resportdenr.s /{os. 2 ancl 3 impugned Nottce No. 549/ 7/ 5/ ACP/ C8lRW/ CLIMC/ 2014, dated 29-10 2014 directtng pe:tilioner Lo Lranclouer conserLt for the eJfected portktn ol propertq bearing Mpl No 5-7-549 (C.F) admeasuing 19, 15 sq yards located on Lhe main roctd aL Nampallg, J'rom Dk Minar Masjid toluards Mallepatly, [lyderabad as iltegat, arbitrary and in uiolaLion of principLes of nutural justice and consequentlg set aside the satne, as illegat and arbitrary."

2. Heard Sri K.Jamali Mohd.Kaleem Ul Haque, learned counscl for the peLiLioner and Sri M.Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel lor responck:nt Nos.2 and 3. I

3. I-earnr:d cr.,ur-.iscl lor the pctitiorrer represented t Itat the issuc raisccl in tltc pr.t'scnt r.r,rit 1;etition is squzrru:1,r, cor.,crcd [l-v the Common Orcler dared IS.1O.2O2S,l)assed in W.p.No.34g96 of '2O14 ancl baL<:h, and thcrefore, prayecl ro disposc o[ the pr-L-scl1t \\nt pelition in lcrms of orders passcd by this Court in W.P.No.3.1 8c),i ol'.,01-t iLncl lratch.

4. Learncd Standing Cor-rnsel fbr rcslrondent Nos.2 to 3 did not disputc thc strbmissions maclc b-t.. thc lcarncd Counscl for the pctitioncr. 5 Acco:rlingh., this n,rit petition is disposcd of in terms o[ ordcr dalcrl 15.10.2025 ir.r W.p.No.3489ii ol 2014 and barch Tl-rcrc shall ltc no or.dcr zls Lo costs Misccllaneorr:; . ltctitions pcnding, il any, shail stand c:lclsercl SD/. K. BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The.Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Dept, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Having its office at Municipal Bhavan Lovirer Tank Bund Rbad, UyderabaO.. ureater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Abids, Hyderabad. 3 I!94ssl ,City Planner, Town ptanning Section, Circte No. 8, Central Zone, 4. Or.:e CC to SRt K.JAMALt MOHD.KALEEM U1 HAQUE, Advocate tOpUCI 5. ONC CC tO SRI M.ARUN KUIVAR. SC FOR GH^iIC I.)PI ICI "v (e. vvJ r) Two CCs to Gp FOR MCpL or relangana at Hyoeraoao fBMN Two CD Copies SlB:,t"yl,lrBf.Jrrfll;;0", o"ted .r s.1o.2o2s passed by this court in & URBAN DEV' High court for the state PMK TJ 0t1 HIGH COURT DATED:1011212025 ..:,...-- _:::::. I,i " ( 2 4 il! 2l;n (:. a,i .,t I '.../. : ).., .: ,,, .:i,. ') ! t ORDER WP.No.37562 of 2014 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0t-P ,\3 dE CHIEF ruSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDR. https://csis.tshc.goyio/hcorderv2ot4/wp/wp 34E96_20t4.pdI lt HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION Nos.34896 34898 34922 34945 34957 349s8 and 35178 of2014 COMMONORDER: The prayer sought for in all the Writ petitions is one and the same, i.e., to issue a W rit of Mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over their respective properties situated at Nampalty Cross Roads, Hyderabad, in any manner, except by following due process of law, and further, not to dispossess the petitioners from their respective properties except by acquiring the same and by paying compensation as per the fught to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabititation and Resettlement, Act.

2. Since the issue involved in alt these Writ petitions is common, all the Writ Petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by common order.

3. Heard Sri Vedula Srinivas, leamed senior counsel appearing for petitioners, and Sri M.Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondents-GHMc. of4 2/12/2026,4:59 PM M .fHE HON'BLI TIIE CI IIt I' ruS I I('I SRI PIN {KI CIiA\DR https:,,'csts.tshc.gov. in/hcorders/20 I 4lx, 2 LIYA, J tVP. n'o.3 489 6 of 20 t 4 and botch 4. Leamed senior counsel appearing for thc petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the ou,ners of their respective pr.operties siruated at Narnpally Cross Roads, Hyderabad, having purchased the same under registered sale deeds, and they have been in peacelul possession and enjoyment of the same. He further subrnitted that the respondents_GHMC are intertering with the possession of the subjeot properties by the petitioners without following due process as contemplated uncler law. He further subrritted lhat in fact, the respondents-GHNIC issued notices dated 19.1 I.2012 to the petitioners calling upon them to produce the ou,ncrship clocuments of their respective properties and further intrrnating thern that their properties would be affected in the proposed road widening from Ekminar junction to Bazarghatt junction including Slip road/Ekminar junction improvement. Learned senior counsel furlher submitted that the respondents have not initiated any proceedings for acquisition of the respective properlies of the petitroners and have straightaway issued notices to the petitioners to produce the ownership documents, which is contrary to the settled principle of law. By contending thus, leamed senior counscl submitted that if the respective properties of the I of4 3 LNA, J lltP- No.3489 6 of 20 l4 dnd botch petrtroners afe required for the proposed road widening, the respondents-GHMC may be directed to follow due process of law for acquisition and prayed to a[[ow the Writ Petitions

5. Leamed Standing Counsel for respondents-GHMc submitted that if the respective properties of the petitioners are required for the proposed road widening, the respondents would initiate appropriate proceedings for acquisition of same in accordance with law.

6. Right to property is a constitutional right and no person shall be deprived of his/her property, however, the Govemment can acquire private property if the same is required for public purpose(s), by following due [ega[ process.

7. In view of the same and recording the submissions of the leamed Standing Counsel for respondents-GHMC, these Writ Petitions are disposed of, directing the respondents-GHMC not to interfere with the respective properties of the petitioners except in accordance with the procedure contemplated under law. 3 of 4 2112t2026,4.59 PM THE IION'BLE THt CHIEF JUSTICE SRI )INAKI CHANDR hitps:,i/csis. tshc. gov. irl,lhcordcrs,l0l 4i wp/$p 34g96 2014 4 LNI, J rttP.No-34896 of 2014 and balch 8 Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs Date:15.10.2025 LAXMI NART\YANA ALISHETTY, J 4 of 4 2/1212026, 4:59