✦ High Court of India · 04 Jun 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 04 Jun 2025

Court

High Court of India

Decided

04 Jun 2025

Bench

Not available

Length

1,143 words

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure §151 Constitution of India

lg0qlqngLi ?Fyeel, S/o. Sri. A.Sri Hari Rao, Age. 43 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. Plot No.HlG-35, KPHB gth phase, Kukatfatt!, nyOdraOad, feiang.*j---' .,.PETITIONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rgp tqd by its principal Secretary. Dept. of Municipal Administration, B.R.Ambedkar Telahgana Seiretariat Building, Tetangani- '- 2. The Commissioner, Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), :*?Tq Jayanti complex, Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, Srinivasa ttagar, Ameerpet, HyoeraDao, tetangana.

3. The Commissioner, Sangareddy Municipality, Sangareddy (M) & District, Telangana. 4 The.Town. Planning Officer, Sangareddy tvtunicipality, Sangareddy (M) & District, Telangana.

5. The Collector, Sangareddy District, Telangana 6. A.-S_udtrakar, S/o.Sri.Subba Rao. Age. 61 years, Occ. Advocate. PUo. 1203, DSR Reganti Apartment, MadhapurlHyderdbad

7. P.Brahmanna, S/o. Sri.Krishnaiah, Age. 62 years, Occ. Chartered Accountant, FJo. 2O4, Sri Krishna Sai Apartments, YousufgudaCheckpost, yousufguda, Hyderabad.

8. M/s. TJR INFRA and DEVELOPERS, Rep. by Tatikonda Janaki Ram Reddv and others, Rt/o. D.No.3-9-5111117, ploi Nd.117, Sri Ram Naqar Colonv. Mansoorabad, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District - SOO 074 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 or Direction more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus duly declaring the action of the respondent Nos. 2nd and ...RESPONDENTS 8th proceecling ,3rd respondents in rssuing/approving the building permit order/la) rr:spcndent herein vide No.005709/LO tHt\tDA t12gZtSKpt2O24, dated 28.05.2025 withc ut and considering tht; representation/ 28.05.2025 as be,ng iilegat, unjust, natural justice which is in gross violati the Constitution cf lnrlia and consequ dated 28.05.2025 I ide Application granted in favour of Fkrspondent No.B. notice, enquiry objections filed by the petitioner dated arbitrary, against the b,:si,; principles of on of Article- j4, 21 , 19{.1)() and 300_4 of entially suspend the Buil,jin g permit order No. 00S70g/LO/HM D/\/ 1 2g2tSKp 12024 out permission application IANO:1OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circums;tances stated in the affidavit filerl in support of the petition, the High Court rnay :e pleased to suspend the proce ed rgs in apprication No.005709/Lo/HMDA/ 1zD2rSKpt2o24, dated 28.05.2025, :errtling disposal of the main writ petition. AND URBAN DEVELOPMEN'I Counsel for the pelitiorrer: Ms. DEVINENI RADHA RANI counser for the Re';porrdent No.1: AGp FoR MUNrctpAL ADMTNIS.TRATT.N - ..'-'' Counsel for the Rer;por dent No.2: SRI V.NARASIMHA GOUD, S.0. ,:OR HMDA Counsel for the Res,pondent No.3 & 4: :1 j^u_rTA KRIS H NA RE c, D\,, Counsel forthe ResponCent No.S: Gp FOR REVENUE Counset for the ResponrJent Nos.6 & 7: _ Counsel for the Resrronrlent No.g: SRI M.DURGA PRASAD The Court made the follcwing: ORDER SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES THE HON,BLE SMT WSTICE K.SUJANA UIRIT PETITI ON No.I 544O of2025 o RDER: " - The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliet: '......to issue a Wit or Order or Directbn more pantiatlarlg onc' in the ii. writ of Mdftdamus dulg declaing- the qction of the ')itir"iJ", "u.t..2. alta s in is'siing/ ipP'ouing ite bu,ilding permit "";;;;';i * tri"rtiq ottt permission to 8'" reipoident herein uide.Proceeding r't,. oo s z o q / to / u il o a/ t z s z / s rp / -' 2?0, ^. -' ""o ;;;;,,L;:"; 28.05.2025 uithout notrce enquiry and gonsr-d12n-o the -petitioner dated 28'05 2025 .enrt senlotion/ obiections fled bg I'he - i nci p t e s of , t' ;;;;; i,i i: iLt." ;;;; .' ;, ;;;" d. os i i n'' . t he. b a s i c "iohTion o[ Articles ta.' 21' l9(l)(g) nrrturol iustic" Lahich is in g'oss ;i';' ; ; d;' ;1, ; i,,oii'' nJ' o I t' di" nd''o n se que nti att s su spe nd the Bttildtng Petmit order iated 28 05 2025 vide A-pplication 'i, o6#ost'tot ,n ro/ 1292/iKP/ 2024 sranted in favour of Respondent No-8 -. .'" .p Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri V' Narasimha 2. Goud, Iearned Standing counsel for HMDA appearing for respondent No.2; Sri Putta Krishna Reddy' Iearned Standing Counsel for Municipality appearing for respondent Nos'3 and 4 and Sri M Durga Prasad, learned counseL appearing for respondent No 8' Perused the record- that without Le arne d counsel for the petitioner .submitted

3. considering the dbjections/ representation dated 2a'O5'2025 hled by the petitioner, respondent No'3 issued building permit order dated 28.O5.2l25in favour of respondent No 8 for construction of building' as such, requestecl this Court to direct the respondents to hear the petitioner before issuing permission to the respondent No'8'

4. Le:rr-rrt:d counsel for the respondents *,ould s,bmit that order - dated l4 0S.:}O2S order lacks material information Consequently, on 21.O5.2O)-5, a fee intimation letter was issued, ar d respondent No.8 pai<l .lLe required fee on 03.o6.202s as rlir rcted by the municipzrl althorities. Horvever, no layout perrr:ir;si, rn has been granted.

5. Har inrl regard to the submissions made by brtl parties and the materiirl zrr aila_bie on record, ancl as both parties lLar e stated that no layout ternrission has been granted as of todav, tho respondent authorities arr directed to conduct an enqulry orL or before 30.06.2025, ,,lter giving an opportuniO, to both rar ties. before granting zrn y permission.

6. With lh ( above directions, There shall ;t: n: order as to costs. the writ petition i,; r lisposed of Miscr ila neous petitions, if an-y pending, shall sta rd closed //TRUE COPY// To, 1 The Princip,:l ll3cretary, Dept. of Municipa Telangana S ecre rtariat Building, Telangana, S sd/- P. PADMANABHA REDDY \,, DEPTJTT REGISTRAR sEc'l ltr, \ t i$ulninistration, tatVof Telanga na ION OFFICER B.R.Ambedkar

2. The Commir;siorer, Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Autlrority (HMDA), Swgrnq Jayzrnti c;omplex, Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, Srinivasir \a,;ar, Ameerpei, Hyderabad, feha rgana.

3. The Commissioner, Sangareddy Municipality, Sangaredd 7 (M) & District, Telangana.

4. The Town l)larr ring Officer, Sangareddy Municipality, {iarnEareddy (M) & District, Tela rqerrra. "

5. The Collecto.. S i ngareddy District, Telangana 6. One CC to lvrs I)EVINENI RADHA RANI, Advocate [OPUC] ,l

7. One CC to SRt M.DURGA PRASAD, Advocate tOpUCI B. One CC to SRt PUTTA KRTSHNA REDDY, S.C. for Municipatities [OPUC] 9. One CC to SRt V.NARASTMHA GOUD, S.C. for HMDA tOpUCI 10.Two CCs to Gp for-Municipal Administration a Development, High court ror tne s-tatetr rerangana at Hyderabad. ,31rH*. HyoeraoJo. jo[' rvr r\Evtjrrr're' Hrgn uourt for the State of Telangana at 1 'l . Two CCs to Gp for Revenue, High Court fo

12.Two CD Cooies BSR MP .: *l VACATION COURT HIGH COU]?T DATED:0410612025 \ \ ORDER WP.No.154,10 cf 2025 r1)' =::\ ),4 r tr" []5 ,t rq5 ,^ .t: I (: o .", .jrl" // 4,2 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT C:OSTS