Saini Narsimhaiah v. 1. The State of Telangana

2. The District Collector, Warangal, Warangal District. 3. The Greater Warangal lvlunicipal Corporation, Warangal District, rep. by its Commissioner. 4. The Deputy It/unicipal Commissioner Office Circle-ll, Kazipet, Greater Warangal [\/unicipal Corporation, Warangal District, rep.by its Deputy [\/unicipal Commissioner. 5. Pogulalayakar Johnson, S/o. Mosses, Age. 66 yrs, Occ. Retired Employee, FVo. H.No. 2-6-959, flat.No.'103. first floor, LaxmiSai Residency, KLtV Reddy Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District.

6. Pogula Johnson Abraham, S/o. Pogulalayakar Johnson, Age. 33 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 2-6-959, flat.No.103, first floor, LaxmiSai Residency, KLlt4 Reddy Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. 7. PogulaJeshrone Abraham, S/o. Pogulalayakar Johnson, Age. 32 yrs, Occ. Pvt.Employee, Rio. H.No. 2-6-959, flat.No.103, first floor, LaxmiSai Residency, KLM Reddy Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District.

8. ChinthalapaniVenugopal Reddy. S/o. fVladhusudhan Reddy, Age. Major, Occ. Real Estate business. R/o. H.No. 6-12IAUC, Vivek Nagar Colon Warangal (Town), Warangal District. 9. D.Jitendar Reddy, S/o.Not Known, Age. I\liajor, Occ, Real Estate Business. Rl/o.H.No 6-12lAl/C, Vivek Nagar Colony, Warangal(Town), Warangal District. 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 direction more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus, declaring the building permission of ...RESPONDENTS I I I No.3006/24831|W 54l2O2O of 8tn respondent and building permission No.3006/2485 tW 5412022 of 9rh respondent granted by the 4th respondent they are issued without verifying the documents. without due process of law and in contrary to the Greater Warangal Municipal Corporation Building Rules as illegal arbitrary against the principals of natural justice in contrary to the Greater Warangal [Vlunicipal Corporation Building Rules. Consequently to direct the respondent. No 2 to cancel the building permission No.3006/24831lW 54l2O2O of Brh respondent and building permission No.3006/2485lW5412O22 ol 9th respondent by considering the petitioners representations dated 22-02-2023, 13-3-2023, 2O-O3-2O23. pending disposal of to 4 the Writ Petition lA NO:1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 15'1 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 2lo 4 to cancel the building permission No.3006/24831|W5412020 of 8th respondent and building permission No.3006/2485 M5412O22 of gth respondent by considering the petitioner's representations dated 22-02-2023, 13-3-2023, 2O-O3-2O23 pending disposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. CHALAKANI VENKAT YADAV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1to2 : GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos,3&4: SRI PASHAM MOHITH SC FOR GWMC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.8&9: Ms. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6to7:- The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11847 OF 2023 ORDER: (ORAL) Heard Mr. Chalakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Pasham Mohith, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Warangal Municipal Corporation (GWMC), appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4, and Mr. Aluvala Kedharnath representing Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned counsel for respondent Nos.B and 9, and perused the material available on record

2. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.B and 9 and iearned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 have taken preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition

3. lt is submitted that at the first instance, W.P.No.6440 of 2022 was filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to GWMC to stop illegal construction of unofficial respondents. The said writ petition was dismissed by order dated 07.02.2022 by noting that building permissions have been granted to respondent Nos.B and 9 and that dispute is regarding the encroachment of the petitioner's property. This Court held that the dispute regarding 2 encroachment can be decided by the civil court and the petitioner has to approach the civil court to settle the dispute. lt was also noted that so far as respondent Nos.3 and 4 are concerned, there is no cause of action against them and no direction can be given to consider the representations of the petitioner vrrth regard to encroachment

4. ln the instant writ petition, the petitioner sought for a relief to cancel the building permissions of respondent No.B and respondenl No.9 vrde permit No.3006124831M5412020 dated 01 12.2021 and permit No.3006/24850M54t2020 dated

12.12.2021 respectively, pursuant to the representations dated

22.02.2023. 1 3.03.2023 and 20.03.2023

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the representations have been submitted by the petitioner for cancelling the building permissions, which is a new cause of action

6. lt needs to be noted that the fact of building permissions being granted to respondent Nos.8 and g was informed to this Court during hearing in W.P.No.6440 of 2022 and taking note of it, the writ petition was dismissed. Thus, the question of -t submitting representations and thereafter approaching this Court for the same cause of action does not arise. The observations and directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.6440 ot 2022 operate against the petitioner and the dispute, if any, has 1o be sorted before the competent civil court. There is no cause of action for approaching this Court for the second time. There are no merits in the writ petition.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed. SD/. A.H.S. GOWRI SHAN ASSISTANT REG R ,TRUE COPY// I CTION OFFICER One CC to SRl. CHALAKANI VENKAT YADAV, Advo Two CCs to GP FOR IVUNICIPAL ADIVIINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,Hig h Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] PASHA IV] N,'IOHITH , SC FOR GWIVCIOPUC] One CC to SRl. J ITHENDER RAO VEERAIVIALLA, Advocate[oPUC] One CC to [Vls. Two CD Copies oPUCI To, 1 2 3 4 5 w HIGH COURT DATED:1810812025 1Hf S i"4 21 0CT 2n5 $.( ,) ,/,i /'4-' /i.rj \,- '(( tl, rr 1rC fl(.1O ORDER WP.No.11847 ot 2023 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITI-IOUT COSTS 'f