The High Court · 2025

Smt. Nimma Housewife, R/o. H. Uppal Khalsa, UPPaI , R.R.District. Wo- Mohan 2-5-2, Bharath Nagar, Occ: Road, ...PETITIONER AND Administration, A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad' 1 . The Govemment of A.P., Rep. by its Pd. Secretary Department of Municipal 2. il;'e;;'i;tibnerh speciat ofticrir, G H'M-c,lpgF9'o' 5: iii; D"dir-c;missioher, Kapra circle, G.H'M'c' Hvderabad' 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 Direction, or a Writ particularly one in the nature of Writ of MandamusoranyotherappropriateWritdeclaringtheactionoftheactionofthe RespondentNo-3andhisofficialstakinganystepsfordemolitionoftheexisting compound wall or for encroachment of the property of the petitioner Open Plot bearing No. 32 admeasuring 180 Sq. Yds" situated in Sy' Noi' 454' 45511' 441' 42l{) and 439, of Kapra under Kapra Municipality, Keesara Mandal. R.R. District aS illegal, arbitrary, capricious and random uniust' resulting in grave miscaniage of iusticeandwhimsicalonparloftherespondentswtrictrisdetrimentaltothe Fundamental Rights of the petitioner guaranteed under the constitution and consequently direct.the respondents not to take or cause to take any manner of steps or acts for demolition of the existing compound wall of the property of the petitionerOpenPlotbearingNo.32admeasuringlsOsq'Yds''situatedinSy' Nos. 454, 45511,441' 440 and 439, of Kapra under Kapra Municipality, Keesara Mandal, R.R. District. Petition under Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue l)irection to the Respondents No. 1 to 3 not to take or cause to take any manner of steps or acts for demolition of the existing gompound wall surrounding the property of the petitioner Open Plot bearing No. 32 admeasuring 180 Sq. Yds., situaterl in Sy. Nos. 454. 45511, 441, 44O and 439, of Kapra under Kapra Municipality, Keesara Mandal, R.R. District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petitior . Coun*:l for tfte Petitaoner: SRt K.RAVIKANTH (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent No.I: GP FOR MPCL ADiIN & URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI SRINIVAS RAO PACFMTA" SC FOR GHMC The Corrrt made the following: ORDER * THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO UIRIT PETITION No.L2LZL of 2OL1, ORDER: This Writ Petition is liled seeking the following relief: '...to issue direction or a .,vrit particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or ariy other appropriate Writ declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 and his officials taking any steps for demolition of the existing compound wall or for encroachment of the property of the petitioner Open Plot bearing No.32 admeasuring 180 Sq.Yds., situated in Sy.Nos.454, 455/L, 44L, 44O and 439 of Kapra under Kapra Municipaliqr, Keesara Mandal, R.R.District., as illegal, arbitrary, capricious and random unjust resulting in grave miscarriage of justice and whimsical on part of the respondents which is detrimental to the' Fundamental Rights of the petitioner guaranteed under the constitution and consequently direct the respondents not to take or cause to take any manner of steps or acts for demolition of the existing compound wall of the property of the petitioner Open Plot bearing No.32 admeasuring 180 Sq.Yds., situated in Sy.Nos.454, 4551L, 441, 44O and 439 of Kapra under Kapra Municipality, Keesara Mandal, R.R.District..."

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 28.O8.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of open plot bearing No.32 admeasuring 18O Sq.Yards., in Sy.Nos.454, 455/1, 44L, 44O and 4gg situated at Kapra Municipalit5r, Keesara Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the s€une from his vendor under the registered sale deed bearing document No.5847 of Lggg dated O4.L2.1999. Thereafter, petitioner 2 applied for regulanzation of plot before respondent No.2 and after due verificati<ln, respondent No.2 has issued land regularization proceedings. It is contended that respondent No.3 has been visiting the subject 1>ropert5r of the petitioner and has been making trials to trespass into the propert5r of the petitioner. Having come to know the same, tht: petitioner approached respondent No.3, who informed that the property of the petitioner is being taken for laying road for ingress and egress to the existing burial ground, which is in existence since the time immemorial, which is far away from the subject property and is entirely irrational and illegal. It is further contended that on 2L.O4.2Oll, some officials of respondent No.3 came to the subject property of the petitioner and tried to demolish the existing compound wall, but their attempts were spoiled with the timely intervention of the neighbour:; and well wishers of the petitioner. Thus, respondent Nos.2 and 3 reSC,rted to whimsical acts without following due process of law. Hence, the present writ petition-

4. Sri Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that earlier this Court passed orders in W.P.M.P.No.14869 of 2OL1 directing the respondents not to resort to demolition 'uvithout following due process of law- [n view of the same, the respondent authorities have inspected the subject site and observed that the olcl compound wall is existing in open plot bearing No.32, in Sy.Nos.454, 45511, 441, 44O and 439 situated at Bhavani Nagar, Kapra village and Manda-I, and. in view of the orders of this Honble Court \-{ (, (- J stated supra, the respondent-Corporation did not initiate any action' He further submitted. that if respondent Nos'2 and 3 contemplate to take arfy action, they would follow due procedure as contemplated under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2o19, by issuing notice to the petitioner and also afford an opportunity of hearinq to the petitioner'

5.Inviewoftheabovesubmission,thisCourtdeemsitfitand propertodisposeofthewritpetitiondirectingrespondentNos.2and3 tofollowdueprocessoflawascontemplatedundertheTelangana Municipalities Act, 2(.lg, before initiating any action in respect of tlre subject ProPertY.

6.ItisneedlesstosaythatrespondentNos.2and3shallaffordan opportunityofpersonalhearingtothepetitionertosubmitallnecessary documents,beforepassingappropriateorders,inaccordancewithlaw. T.Accordingly,thiswritpetitionisd.isposedof.Thereshallbeno order as to costs- Asasequel,miscellaneousapplicationspend'ing'ifany'inthis Writ Petition, shall stand closed. L. ,ITRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER S, Secretariat, toPucl To

2. 3. 4.

5. 6. 7. PSK.w HIGH COURT DATED:04/0912025 o WP.No.12171 of 2011 ( ,) J or, ',.. * lHE S 1 6 rr8 202fi * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOI,'T COSTS \a .*ta X.-