M/s Kshitij lnfraventures Pvt Limited v. at Secretariat, Hyderabad

managing director Mr.Krishnam Raju. ...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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, Order or Direction, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in not acting upon the complainV representation of the petitioner dated 8.4.2025 and not taking action against the illegal construction activity undertaken by the 3rd Respondent in the Premises bearing No. 1-2-630, Sy No. 15711 to 3, 158i1 and 2, 159 and 159/1 forming part of T.S.No. 27, Ward No. 76, Block B, Bakaram Village, Musheerabad Mandal, Hyderabad District, as illegal and arbitrary and to consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to forthwith stop the above construction work, Award costs. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circu mstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may ce pleased to issue interim directions to the 2nd Respondent to forthwith act upon the complainUrepresentation of the petitioner dated 8.4.2025 and take steps for stopping the construction activity undertaken by 3rd Respondent in the Premises bearing No. 1-2-630, Sy No. 15711 to 3, 158/1 and 2, 159 and 159/1 forming part of T.S.No. 27, Wa,d No. 76, Block B, Bakaram Village, Musheerabad t\/andal, Hyderabad District, pending disposal of W P No. of 2025. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: cP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR cHMC Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: SRI V.MURALI MANOHAR The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PEIITION No.12654 of 20.25 ORDER: Heard Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.2, Sri V. Murali Manohar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 Perused the record.

2. According to the petitioner it is the absolute owrrer arrd possessor of ac.6-0O guntas of land out of Ac.22-2O guntas of land in premises bearing No.1-2-630, Sy.No.l57 lL to 3, 158/ | and 2, 159 and 159 /l forming part of T.S.No.27, Ward No.76, Block B, Bakaram Village, Musheerabad Mandal, Hyderabad on the strength of two registered documents bearing Nos.1349/2O09 dated

27.LO.2OO9 and 135O/2009 dated 28.10.2OO9. It is also claiming that it is the absolute owner and possessor of Ac.l6-2O guntas of land comprised in the s€une survey number, ward and block on the strength of a decree IiL,J w.P.No.l2654 oI2O25 2 dated 24.03.2024 passed in O.S.No.624l of 2022 by the learned II Additiona-l Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 3'd respondent 1S proceeding with the construction of compound wall encircling the said property without obtaining proper permission from 2"d respondent. It is un-authorized construction. Therefore, he has submitted a representation dated O8.O4.2O25 to the 2.d respondent with a request to take acllon against

3.d respondent. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, 2'd respondent did not ac,t upon the sarne. Aggrieved by the said in-action of 2"d respondent, petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. Whereas, learned counsel appearin5i for 3'd respondent on instructions would submit that 3'd respondent is the owner of entire land aclmeasuring Ac.22-2O guntas of land in premises bearing ltlo.1-2-630, Sy.No.I57 ll to 3, 158/ I and 2, 159 and l59ll forming part of T.S.No.27,Ward No.76, Block B, Bakaram Village, Musheerabad Mandal, Hyderabad. 3'd respondent is in KL,J w P No 12654 of 2025 J possession of the said property. On 20.04.2025 Police, Domalaguda found a dead body in the said property. Police, Domalaguda have also registered a case in Crime No.108 of 2025 under Section 194 of BNSS. Therefore, to protect the said property from illegal activities, 3.d respondent has erected blue sheets. They are not proceeding with construction of any compound wall as alleged by petitioner herein. Learned counsel for 3.d respondent also would submit that there is a dilapidated old compound wall which is in dilapidated condition encircling the subject property.

4. Whereas, Sri G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for .respondent No.2 on instructions would submit that 3.d respondent is not proceeding with any construction and it has only erected blue sheets. If 3.d respondent or any person proceed with the construction without obtaining prior permission from Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, 2nd respondent will take action strictly in accordance with (L'J !J P.No 12654 of 2025 4 the procedure laid down under the Greater Hyderabad MuniciPal CorPoration Act' 1955' \

5. Thus, both petitioner and 3'd respondent claiming right over the subject property' There are title disputes with regard to subject property' 2"d 2"d respondent serlotls respondent cannot consider the same' will only consider prima-facie title and poss'ession over the subject property' During the course of h'earing' it is brought to the notice of this Court that several suits including O.S.No'62 1 of 2022 are related to the subject property. In the light of the said submission' this writ petition 6. is disposed of directing 2'd resirondent to take action against 3'd respondent or any other person who makes construction of compound wall without obtaining prior permission from 2nd respondent strictly irL accordance \Mith the proced'ure laid down under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act' 1955' There shall be no order as to costs' KL.J W.P.No 12654 of2025 5

7. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition sha_Il stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.V. KAVITHA DEPUW REGIST I SECTION OFFICER To, 1, Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal A[tinistration and Urban Development Department at Secretariat, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad

2. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Lower Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad represented by its Commissioner

3. Managing director Mr.Krishnam Raju, M/s DBR Mills Ltd., '1-2-630, Lower Tank bund, Hyderabad.

4. One CC to SRI N.SREEDHAR REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of 6 7 R BGS Telangana. [OUT] One CC to SRI G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI V.MURALI MANOHAR Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies ($- HIGH COURT DATED: 2810412025 ORDER WP.No.12654 of 2025 ( s14 14: o 0 6 JUN 2u6 _t C) * o Ssp.,iic HF:o {+ * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (il- _- ,rtt