V. Srinivasa Rao, S/o v. Iriladhusudhan Rao, Flat No

2. Sri Ranga Raj, The Asst Commissioner (Town Planning ) Circle -X . Greater Hyderabad Munrcipal Corporation Khairatabad, Hyderabad.

3. V Srinivas, S/o Sri V Venkateswarlu, R/o FIat No 303, SS Prime View 8-2-293 I 82 lFt40B, Road No. 7, Film Nagar Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad 500 096 ...Respondents l'rrF[' f J Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri. D Ravishankar Rao Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1, 2 : Sri Midde Arun Kurrar (Standing Counsel For Gl-rl\lC) Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: Sri S Niranjan Reddy S,)nior Counsel Represented Sri . K.Rusheek Reddy WRIT PETITION NO: 4495 OF 2010 Between:

1. Smt. M. Geetha, W/o fU Thulasi Ram Prasad, Flat Nc, i02, S.S Prime View, B-2-293lB2lFl40B, Road No.7, Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills Hyderabad-sOO 096. 2. Rajashri S, Kattimani, W/o. Santha Raj Kattimani, F ar No.101, S S.Prime View, B-2-293lB2lFl40B, Road No 7, Film Nagar. Jr'bir-.e Hills, Hyderabad- 500 096. 3 V Srinivasa Rao, S/o V Mladhusudhan Rao, Flat No 202, S S.Prime View, 8-2'293lB2lFI40B, Road No.7, Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills -lyderabad-500 096. 4. Dr T Srinivasa Reddy, S/o. T. Janardhan Reddy, F al No 203, S.S.Prrme Yiew, B-2-2931821F1408, Road No.7, Film Nagar, Jubllr:e Hills, Hyderabad- 500 096 Petitioners AND

1. The Principal Secretary, I/lunicipal Administration, Secre:tariat. Hyderabad. 2. The Secretary, fi/inistry of Municipal Administration, Secrertariat, Hyderabad. 3. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corl:oration. Boorgula Ramakrishnarao Bhawan, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

4. The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporati,cn, Khairatabad, Hyderabad

5. The Zonal Commissioner, Central Zone, Greater Hyderzrbad lrlunicipal Corporation, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.

6. The Assistant Commissioner (Town Planning), Circle-X. Cjreater Hyderabad lvlunicipal Corporation, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.

7. V Srinivas, R/o. Flat No.303, S.S.Prime View 8-2-29318 2tFl40B, Road No.7, ...Respondents Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-sOO 096. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndra praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High t}turt may be pleased to direct the official respondents 1 to 6 to take all necessar\/ steps from stopping the respondent No.7 in proceeding with illegal and unauthorized construction being made to Flat No.303, in 4th Floor of S.S. Prime View Hous ng Complex, bearing Municipal H.No. 8-2-293l82lFl4OB, Road No.7, Film l.lagar. Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad 500 096 including demolishing of the said iller;:rl and unauthorized -a-rr-.*ffif'o +rrr / ,r"- i' 'r.1r, construction being made in the said Flat by issuance of writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ or order or orders or direction or directions Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri. D Ravishankar Rao Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6 : Sri Midde Arun Kumar (Standing Counsel For GHMC) Counsel for the Respondent No. 7: Sri S Niranjan Reddy WRIT PETITION NO: 28979 OF 2011 Between:

1. Sri. V. Srinivas, S/o Dr. V. Venkateswarlu, Flat No. 303, 2nd and 3rd Floor 'S.S. Prima View', situated at H.No. 8-2-2931821F140-8, Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.

2. V. Madhu, Wo V. Srinivas Flat No. 303, 2nd and 3rd Floor S.S Prima View, situated at H.No. 8-2-2931821F140-8, Film Nagar, ...Petitioners AND '1 . Greater Hyderabad lt/unicipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

2. The Chief City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

3. Assistant City Planner, Circle X, Hyderabad. ...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, one more particularly in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in issuing impugned proceedings No. 40-B/ACP/C10/GHMC/20'10 dated 21 05.2010 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Act, '1955 and set aside the said proceeding and consequently direct the respondents to allow the regularization application as prayed for by the petitioners. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2011(W PMP. NO:38527 OF 2011) Between:

3. Smt. M. Geetha, Wo. M. Thulasi Ram Prasad, Flat No.102, S.S.Prime View, 8-2-293lB2lFl40B, Road No.7, Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-s0O 096. 4. Rajashri S. Kattimani, Wo. Santha Raj Kattimani, FIat No.101, S.S.Prime View, 8-2-293l821F1408, Road No.7, Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad- 500 096. i.]E?'.'..?ia44 AND ...lmplied Petitioners/Proposed Respondents No.4 & 5

6. Sri. V. Srinivas, S/o Dr. V. Venkateswarlu, Flat No. ! 03, 2nd an,l 3rd Floor 'S.S. Prima View', situated at H.No 8-2-2931821F 140 B Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad

7. V- Madhu, W/o V. Srinivas Flat No. 303, 2nd and 3rd t, oor S.S. F,rima View, situated at H.No 8-2-2931821F140-8, Film Nagar, 8 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Representerl lty rts Commissioner, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 9 The Chief City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal C orporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

10. Assistant City PIanner, Circle X, Hyderabad ...Respondents/ Resgrc ndent No. 1,2 and 3 Petition under Rule 16(4) of Writ Rules praying that I the circ,rmstances stated in the affidavrt filed in support of the petition. the High Ccurt may be pleased to permit the petitioners herein to come on record as party res:tondents Nos.4 & 5 in the present W.P. No.28979 of 2011 & WPMP 35841/201 'l being the Flat owners of S.S.Prime View Apartments flat bearing Nos.101 & 102, l t,!o.8-2-293lB2lF l40B Road No.7, Filmnagar, Jubileehills, Hyderabad 500033 are rocessary and proper parties in the present W.P.2897912011 & WPMP 3584112011 l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 35841 OF 2011 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cr crmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court rr a'r be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the issue of the in rpugned proceedings No 4O-B/ACP/C10/GHMC/2010 dated 21.05.2010 of the 1st respondent including the demolition of the petitioners premises in Flat No. 303, 2nd and 3rd Floor, " S.S.Prima View", situated at H.No. B-2-2g3lB2lFl40-8, Film t.lagar, Jubilee Hiils, Hyderabad Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri K.V. Rusheek Reddy Counsel for the Respondents : Sri Midde Arun Kumar (Stan,Jing Counsel For GHMC) The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN CONTEMPT CASE No.334 of 2O1O AND WRIT PETITION Nos.4496 of 2O1O Es 2a979 of 2OLl COMMON ORDER: Smt. M. Geetha and three o[hers hled Writ Petition No.4496 of 2010 seeking a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 6 to take all necessary steps to stop the illegal construction made by 7n respondent in Flat No.303, 4th Floor, S.S. Prime View Housing Complex, bearing Municipal H.No.8-2-293 182/F/4O8, Road No.7, Film Nagar, Jubilee Hiils, Hyderabad.

2. Vide order dated 05.03.201O in WPMP.No.S8O3 of 2010 in W.P.No.4496 of 2OlO, the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh directed 7e respondent not to make any further construction in the subject property.

3. Alleging willfui and deliberate violation of the aforesaid order dated O5.03.2010 by the municipal authorities and 7ft respondent in W.P.No.4496 of 201O, the petitioners therein hled Contempt Case No.334 of 20 10.

4. While the matter stood thus, 7ft respondent in W.P.No.4496 of 201O and his wife have submitted an application under Section 455A of the Greater Hyderabad Municipai Corporation Act, 1955, 2 KL, J Cr t. \ ,,. iltt4 of 2010 and W.P.Nos.4496 of l( I ( & 2tl9?9 of 2011 \. before lst respondent, seeking regularization of thr: subject property. Thereupon, uide letter dated 21.05.2010, the As,si:;lrnt City l,lanner, Circle X, GI{MC, Hyderabad, rejected the srid application. Challenging the said letter dated 21 .OS.2O\O. they have filed W.P.No.28979 of 2011.

5. During the course of hearing, it is brought to _he notice: of this Court by Sri D. Ravishankar Rao, learned counsel ii,r the petitioners in W.P.No.4496 of 2OLO that 1st petitioner, Sri V. Srinivas, in W.P,No.28979 of 2O17, disposed of the subject pro rcrty

6. Sri K.V. Rusheek Reddy, learned counsel 1i,r pctitior-rers in W.P.No.28979 of 2011, disputed the same. Ther-efore, this Court directed him to file an additional affrdavit. Accorclir gly. he has filed an additional affidavit stating that he has noL sold the subject properq/. It is however contended by him that h<: ir ts submitted an application uide BRS Application No.200004ZT65 l:rted 29.I2.2OtS under G.O.Ms.No. 152 dated 02.1 1.2015, seeking regularization of the subject property. Without considering the sai,_1 application, the municipal authorities are tr5ring to demolish the su rject property.

7. Sri Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing Ccunsel for (]HMC, on instructions, would submit that with regard ro the schr:me of BRS, a Special Leave Petition is pending before the ilon,ble Supreme w I I To, 3 KT,. ,] CC.No-334 of 2010 and \'.P.Nos.4496 of2010 & 28979 of201l Court. Subject to the result of the same, the Commissioner, GHMC will consider the aforesaid application submitted by the petitioners seeking regularization of the subject property.

8. According to the petitioners in W.P.No.28979 of 2011, they have completed the construction Lrefore the order dated O5.O3.201O passed by the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in WPMP.No.5803 of 201O in W.P.No.4496 of 2O1O. Therefore, thcre is no violation, much less, willful and deliberate violation of ttre order under contempt.

9. In the Iight of the above, this Contempt Case is closed. Both these Writ Petitions are disposed o[ directing the Commissioner, GHMC, to consider and dispose of BRS Application bearing No.2OOO047765 dated 29.12.2015 hled by the petitioners under G.O.Ms.No. 152 dated O2.ll.2Ol5, subject to the result of the Special Leave Petition pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard to the Building Regularization Scheme. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/. A.V.S.PRASAD DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER I

1. One CC to Sri Midde Arun Kumar (Standing Counset For GHMC) tOpUCl 2. One CC to Sri. D Ravishankar Rao, Advocaie [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri S Niranjan Reddy, Advocate [OpUC] 4. One CC to Sri K.V. Rusheek Reddy, Advocate tOpUCl 5. Two CD Copies *E.*:€ :-€" -'>'i.r.. L/PSLw, HIGH COURT DATED:1510712025 I 2 mim :/ \J, '.t \ \:,, COMMON ORDER CONTEMPT CASE NO: 334 OF 2010 AND WRIT PETITION Nos. 4496 of 2010 & 28979 ol 2011 CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE AND WRIT PETITIONS ARE DISPOSED OF \r(