High Court · 2025

5. Sri Ashok Kumar Das, s/o. sudam charan Das Aged about 38 years, occ. " Fiirri" e*'provee nlo.-Flriiriior, s[,pur Elit"e countv Tsllc colonv Jeedimetla, 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 pleasedtoissue.aWrit,orderordirectionmoreparticularlyoneinthenatureof WR|ToFMANDAMUSdeclaringtheactionoftherespondentauthorities particularly, the action of 4th respondent in issuing the impugned proceeding No.304/UC/TP tClR -26]KPZ /GHIvlC t2025 dated 12t05t2025 stating that there is an unauthorized construction of pent house, Gym and function hall over the permitted Cellar, Stilt + 5 Upper Floors in respect of open land in Sy No 79 situatedatSuraramvillage,GajularamaramMandal,MedchalMalkajgiriDistrict t i t and directing to remove the alleged deviated portions rnarle against the sanctioned plar, wthin 'l 5 days from the date of recerpt of thr,r notice,,further threatening that the I3HMC will remove the alleged deviated por.ion and recover the cost thereof, basing on the complaint daled 113101120:25 by the 5th respondent, without properly serving prior notice and withou t giving proper opportunity of exp anation / hearing the petitioner, is ille,la, arbitrary and contrary to the prol'isions of GHMC Act, 1 955, against the prinr:iples of natural justice and furthermore in violation of Articles 14 and 30C)-A of thr.r Constitution of lndia and const:quently set aside the impugned proceed ng No 3i)4/UC/TP/CIR - 26|KPZ iGHMC l2O2'.5 dated 1210512025 in the interest of justic,:. IA NO: 1 OF 20)1,5 Petition unde- Section 151 CPC praying that in the circ:unrstances stated in the affidavit liled in support of the petition, the High Court mair be pleased to suspend the c,perertion of impugned proceeding No.304/UC/'l-p iAA-ZA,KpZ /GHMC 12025 dated 1210512025 issued by the respondents ancl further direct the respondents to not 1:o interfere in any manner into the Shapur E lite apartments building in the land an extent ot 4151 sq yards equivalent to i\41,1 sq meters in the land in Sy No,i'9 situated at Suraram, Gajularamaram [r/andal under the limits of GHMC. penriing disposal of the above Writ Petitic,n. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KANDI RAMCHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: AGP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 4: SRt K.RAVI MAHENDER, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.15197 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:- "pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondent authorities particularly, the action of 4th respondent in issuing the impugned proceeding No.304AJC/TPiCIR -26/KPZ /GHMC 12025 dated 12/05/2025 stating that there is an unauthorized construction ofpent house, Gym and function hall over the permitted Cellar, Stilt plus 5 Upper Floors in respect of open land in Sy No.79 sinrated at Suraram viltage, Gajularamaram Mandal, Medchal Malkaj giri District and directing to remove the alleged deviated portions made against the sanctioned plan, within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice, further threatening that the GHMC will remove the alleged deviated portion and recover the cost thereof, basing on the complaint dated 23101/2025 by the 5th respondent, without properly serving prior notice and without giving proper opportunity of explanation / hearing the petitioner, is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of GHMC Act, 1955, against the principles of natural justice and firthermore in violation of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the impugrred proceeding No.3O4/UCiTPIC IR -26|KPZ /GHMC 12O25 dated 12105/2025 in the interest ofjustice and to pass....."

2. Heard Sri K.Ramachandra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration appearing on behalf of respondent No.l and Sri K.Ravi Mahender, learned Standing counsel for GHMC appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4 \ -I 2

3. W'ith the consent of leamed counsel for the partie:r, the writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

4. Lr,amed counsel for the petitioner submits that r,::spondent No.4, wtthout issuing any show cause notice and witho rt giving opportunity trt the petitioner, who is the affected parry, p rssed the impugned speraking order behind his back and the same is in gross violation of principles of natural justice.

5. Lermed Standing Counsel appearing for respondent flos.2 to 4 submits that respondent No.4 issued show c.ause notice on

22.04.2025. The same was received by the watchman of tht: subject premises. Hov,ever, neither the petitioner nor their Assoc iat ion have submittecl any explanation. Hence respondent No.4 has rightl y passed the impugned r;peaking order.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner by way ofreply sub:nits that as per Section 452 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, restr,ondent No.4 ought to have issued notice to th,:) person who made unauthorised construction. 7 Adnlittedly, th_e petitioner who made the building construction has not received the notice. -l

8. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition treating the impugned order as show. cause notice and the petitioner is directed to submit the explanation along with documents within a period of t'wo (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such explanation, the respondent Corporation 1S directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the petitioner as well as respondent No.5, including personal hearing, within a period of six (6) weeks thereafter. Till such time, the respondent Corporation is directed not to take any coercive steps in respect of the subject property.

9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs Pending miscellaneous applications, ifany, shall stand closed f To, //TRUE COPY// 1 The Principal Secretary, MunicipalAdministrat Department Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Telangana Hyderabad, State of Telangana. SD/-V. KAVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR TION OFFICER and Urban DeveloPment te Secretariat Buildings,

2. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad 3. The Zonal Commissioner, Kukatpally Zone, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad

4. The DeDUtv Commissioner, circle No.26, Gajularamaram Greater Hyderabad Municip'al Corporation, Hyderabad 5 One CC to SRI KANDI RAMCHANDRA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

6. One CC to Stll K RAVI MAHENDER, SC FOR GHMC [OPUC] 7. Two CCr; to (iP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] / L Two CD Sopi-.s BSR BS W. , \ I t- i It HIGH COI..[RT DATED:21 10512025 VACATION COURT i S T,r\ r4: 3F I / ORDER WP.No.15197 of 2025 ) P o o ?I l4AY zffi Z /// ...* . \r1 ..1 .. T.^ ,,',-O .a' * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT ,COSTS 1\\) t o).'1' fr -t \