High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana' Rep by its Principal Secretary' Municipal ' Alfi i-"i;iA"; ;;d"a ;; ;'D;'"rbp'"nt Dbpa rtment' B' R'Ambed kar 2. The Greate, Warangaii/unicipal Corporation' Rep' by its Commissioner' Waranqal, Warangal District 3. ilii;";ir;ffirrrr]il"f iliE: vothilal, Ased about 65 vears' occ Rtd' reacher' r/o. H.No.1 -B-2as, uaxm'it"esiJ"niv' eltii'audram' Hanmakonda' 4. Gade Madhuri, *lo. ndi'i it-*ti, ng6b M"iot' occ' Homemaker' R/o' Plot No' ' ioi.oevi Gardens, HYderabad' 5. Mirvala Madhavi, */o'ilft;;6"irakash Reddy'.Aoed Maior' occ' Homemaker' r/o..H.No.1_23lr, Cn"rrJilri;'fi ViriliL', iri"i",'itrldnaat, Mahabubabad District o iiii,'oiOi-Sii.i*.'C"OaV,'St6. r_axmtiarayana Reddv. Aoed about 48 years, oci Emplovee, rlo. H.iiii']r'-l-zeinyt ' ouhmanoor ivtah-abubabad 7 Keeta Vaiava, *lo. r<iiiin-i'o', A;;d;;;i 3' veirs' occ' Homemaker' r/o' ' ij;ti;;b-<itohr, Ramnagar, Hanmakonda. ...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 or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or orders declaring the inaction oftherespondentNo.2inconsideringtherepresentationdatedosllll2o24offhe Petitionerandinconductingenquiryonthatrepresentationasarbitrary,biased, vindictive, illegal, violative of Articles 14' 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and against the Principles of Natural Justice' and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to consider the representation dated O5111t2O24 regarding the objections raised by the Petitioner in respect of the permission plan granted to unofficial responden.s and others and pass appropriate orders in i'rccordance with law. lA NO:1 OF 2025 Petition under rsection 151 cPC praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed in s.rpport of the petition, the High court may be p leased to direct 2nd respondent to take steps that the respondents 3 to T,herein slrall not proceed with the construction in pursuance of the permit bearing No.0l28lE pi30o6t2o24 in File No. 000288/BP/[)TCP/3006/0008/ 2024 dated 31-o}-2o24, pen,ting disposal of the representation dated 05-11-2024, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI NADIPALLY ANANDA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1: cP FOR MCPL ADMN & URBLN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI PASHAM MOHITH, SC FOR GWMC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 TO 7: - The Court made the following: ORDER o HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13328 OF 2025 ORDER: (ORAL) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner Company seeking to direct respondent No.2 to consider his representation dated 05 .11.2024 to take action against respondents No.3 to 7 who have obtained building permission by giving wrong description of the subj ect property

2. The petitioner Company claims to have purchased the land admeasuring Ac.l'20 guntas out of Acs.2-00 guntas in Survey No.305/A, situated at Shayampeta Jagir Village, Hanamkonda Mandal and District (erstwhile Warangal District) from its previous owners by name Mr. Chinthala Srinivas, under registered sale deed bearing document No.5991/2013 dated 30.05.2013. While so, one Mr. Chinthala Mallaiah, who was the owner of the land admeasuring Acs.2-16 guntas in Survey No.305/B, sold the land to one Mr. Katukuri Rajaiah n 1956 under an un-registered sale deed' That after the death of Mr. Katukuri Rajaiah, his son by name Mr. Katukuri Veeraiah succeeded the said land and executed a general 2 power of attorney to one Mr. Doli Rajalingam, the Pr esident of Teachers Housing Cooperative Society, wherein the survey number of the said land was wrongly shown as Survey No.305/A. B. Basing on the said false kLnd document, Mr. Doli Rajalingam applied for layout and the Gram Panchayat granted a false layout in his fi Lvour vde D.P. No.3 1/1993. The plots developed in the said layout w,:re sold to respondents No 1.1 to 7

3. It is stated that Mr. Katukuri Veeraiah does not havt any right over the land ir. Survey No.305/A. Taking advantage of the fact that the layout was obtained by mentioning wrong surye) number, respondents Nr'.3 to 7 are interfering with the possessirtn of the petitioner ComJ,any in respect of the subject land. Respon< ients No.3 to 7 have appl r:d for common building permission and r espondent No.2 sanctioneC plan vide Per-rnit No.0l2glBp/30061202+ in File No.000288/BPDTCP13O06/0008/2024 dated 3t.08.2024. A suit in O.S. No.56 of ')-024 was filed by the petitioner Compary against respondents No li to 7 and sixteen (16) others for declarati >n of title and permanent njunction, and the same is pending on the t.ile of the leamed Principal District Judge, Hanamkonda (for short .trirLl Court'). It is further steted that the petitioner company submitter I detailed e) J representation dated 05.11.2024 to respondent No.2 to withhold/revoke the building permission granted in favour of respondents No.3 to 7 but so far, the same has not been considered. As such, the petitioner Company is constrained to approach this Court.

4. Mr. Pasham Mohith, learned Standing Counsel for GWMC, appearing for respondent No.2 Municipal Corporation, submitted that appropriate action will be taken on the representation submitted by the petitioner Company in accordance with law t (

5. As innocuous relief is sought by the petitioner Company, notice to respondents No.3 to 7 is dispensed with.

6. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to act upon the representation of the petitioner dated 05 .11.2024 by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner Company and to respondents No.3 to 7, and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period offour (4) weeks from the date ofreceipt ofa copy of this order. In case, respondents No.3 to 7 are,'tn any way, aggrieved by this order, they are at liberty to approach this Court seeking for modification of this order. Further, the petitioner Company is given liberty to seek for interim orders in the enquiry before respondent No.2 4 I.) to direct respon<il:nts No.3 to 7 not to make any constructior s pending disposal of his representation dated 05.11.2024. There stall be no order as to costs As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if an1 , pending in this writ petition, stand closed. //TRUE COPY/I SD/'A' SRINI'/ASA REDDY ASSISTAN'I" REGISTRAR lt i=-=.--- SECTIO1I OFFICER Waranqal Distri';t 't. -n" Principal Strcretary, Municipal Administration and Urban De:velopment ' D;;;;;;;t, e-.rr am6Sbiiai se[retariat'.nvderahad state of rt lansana' 2. The commissio rer, ffJrr"; W;;;;;l iiaufi icipat corporation, v raransal, s. 6,.""tB"i""siit' r.tn o t pnlr-v ANAN DA RAo.,.Advocate toPU cl 4. Two CCs to Gp Fod'ilEFL ir'ij'nr.N-l uRaliN bEV, Hidh court for the state ' off"r"nqrna, atHYderabad' IOUI 5. 6.;iii; Siii'A'sn-Avt voitirn,'sc FoR GWMC [oPUC] Two CD CoPies 6 PSK. BS \ HIGH COURT DATED:2910412025 CC TODAY 1L s it-. s** +* (\. 'i r; ?.: i- '+ ORDER WP.No.13328 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I // /, / /z ?