Priyadarsini Kalyani Merla v. The State of Telangana

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, order or direction declaring the Revocation Letter bearing Lr. No. 458833/GHMC12062412024, dt. 21.O1 .2025 as well as the Show Cause Notice bearing Notice No. 458833/GHMC12062412024 dt. 04.01 .2025 issued by the Respondent No. b as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently to set aside the same and restore the permission issued in Building Registration/ Self-Certification vide No. 458833/GHMC12062412024 dt. 05.12.2024 and direct the Respondents and their officials not to interfere with the construction and enjoyment of the proposed building by the Petitioner on her land admcasuring 200 sq. yards in Plot No. 37, Sy. No. 14, Khajaguda, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Seclion 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Revocation Letter bearing Lr. No. 458833/GHMC12062412024, dt. 21 .01 .2025 issued by the Respondent No. 3 and direct the Respondents and their officials not to interfere with the construction and enjoyment of the proposed building by the Petitioner on their land admeasuring 200 sq. yards in Plot No. 37, Sy. No. 14, Khajaguda, Serilingampally, Ranga Rcddy District, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SRIRAM POLALI Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for Respondent No.2&3 : SRI G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER -, HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13989 OF 2025 ORDER: (oRAL) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the impugned revocation letter vide Lr.No.458833lGIINlCl20264l2024 dated

21.01.2025 as well as the show cause notice v;Ze Notice No.458833/ GLIMC|20624|2024 dated 04.01.2025 issued by respondent No.3 in respect ofthe subject land admeasuring 200 square yards in Plot No.37 in Survey No14, Khajaguda, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the building permission granted to the petitioner vide permit No.458833/10501/ GHMC12024 dated 05.12.2024 cannot be revoked merely because part of the subject land would be affected in the master plan road. It is contended that the building permission dated 05.12.2024 obtained by the petitioner through seltcertification was revoked under the impugned revocation letter directing him to submit revised proposals showing the master plan road.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the judgment dated 15.10.2024 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in i 2 {!- \ W.A. No.ll2l of 2023 and the order dated 24.04.2023 passed by this Court in W.P. No.19325 of 2020, the impugned revocation letter dated

21.01.2025 is unsustainable and the same is liable to be set aside.

4. Mr. G.Madhusudan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC, appearing for respondents No.2 and 3, submitted that the building application of the petitioner will be considered by duly following the judgment dated 15.10.2024 passed by Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.ll21 of 2023 and the order dated 24.04.2023 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 19325 of 2020. Leamed Standing Counsel submitted that in case land/structures of the petitioner are affected in the master plan, the petitioner will be entitled only for the land compensation and not for structural compensation. The petitioner has applied for the building permission being fully aware that'there is an existing master plan and there is.every likelihood ofthe subject land being affected in the future master plan road. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for structural compensation. The petitioner may be directed to fumish an undertaking that he shall not claim any compensation for the structures made on the subject land -7' -)

5. In paragraph Nos.7 and 8 of the order dated 24.04.2023 passed by this Court in W.P. No.19325 of 2020, it was held as under: "7. As on the date, the respondents have not acquired the property ofthc petitioners by initiating proceedings under the provisions ol Land Acquisition Act, 2013 by attotting alternative land or payment of compensation lor the value of the land, which is required lor the purposc of widening of road notified under G.O.MS.320, dated 18.08.2012' Lven though the Government has issued masterplan for the Mancherial Municipality by notifuing the same in the year 2012, so far, respondents have not taken any steps for implementation of the masterplan' therefbre, the petitioners counsel has rightly contended that notification issued by the Govemment does not take away the right of the petitioners to makc application for building permission for construction of the rnultiplex complex.

8. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that since the petitioners' land is required for the purpose of widening ol 200 fect masterplan, the same shall be acquired by the respondcnts by duly tollowing the procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 20 13 and in the event of the petitioners' land is not required lor acquisition, the respondents are directed to consider the building application submitted by the petitioners strictly in accordance with lavr,."

6. The above said order was challenged in W.A' No. l12l of 2023 wherein it was conceded by the leamed Additional Advocate General that the appellants therein (respondents in W.P. No.19325 of 2020) are ready and willing to grant building permission to the respondents therein (petitioners in W.P. No.19325 of 2020) with a condition that as and when sub.ject land is required for public purpose, the appellants shall initiate action for acquisition of the same in accordance with law. The said writ 4 .- \ appeal was disposed of by judgment dated 15.10.2024 directing the appellants therein to accord building permission to the respondents therein within a period of two (2) months with liberty to incorporate the condition in the building permission that as and when the subject land is required for acquisition, the appellants shall be at liberty to initiate process of land acquisition in accordance with law.

7. [n the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned revocation letter vide Lr.No.458833 /GIilvICl2O264l2O24 dated

21.01.2025 issued by respondent No.3 is set aside. Respondents No.2 and 3 are directed to reconsider the building application of the petitioner without reference to the impugned revocation letter dated 21.01.2025 by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of twenty one (21) days from the date of receipt. of a copy of this order. In case, part of the structures/subject land of the petitioner is required for widening of road as per master plan, the respondent authorities shall acquire the same in accordance with law. The contention of the leamed standing counsel for GHMC that the petitioner is not entitled for structural compensation is left open to be decided at the appropriate time when land of the petitioner 7 f along with structures is acquired in the future. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/- P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal secretary to the Government, Municipal Administration and ' Urban Oetietop*ent, Siate of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad 5O0 022 2. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC)' CC Complex, Tank Bund Road, HYderabad \

3. The Zonal commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal corporation (GHMC) Serilingampally Zone, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District

4. One CC to SRI SRIRAM POLALI, Advocate. [OPUC]

5.TwoCCstoGPFoRMCPLADMNURBANDEV,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana. [OUT]

6. One CC to SRI G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC' [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies BSK GJPw HIGH COURT DATED:0210512025 i) (-) ORDER WP.No.13989 of 2025 --jr-\ /4;1e14;;X 7 * s LJ .C) .\.q.- CA t-\ 3 r: ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS tK