The High Court · 2025

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 pass an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of Respondents more particularly the ...RESPONDENTS Respondent No.3 in not stopping the illegal constructions activities made by the Respondent Nos 4 and 5 over the premises bearing H.Nr. 6-2-534 to 6-2-535, situated at chinthala Basthi, Khairatabad, Hyderabad w rich is against to the sanction plan and without leaving setbacks while encroac lrng the common area for which effecting the easementary rights apart from pass lge to the premises of Petitioner i.e , H.No.6-2 534/1 , chinthala Basthi, Khairatab ad, Hyderabad despite submitting Representations, Dated 24 05.2023, .13.06 20;13 and 22.08.2023 by the Petitioner as rllegal, arbitrary, against to the law ard also against to the provisions of GHMC Act and consequently direct the Respcndent No.3 to stop the illegal constructrons of Respondent Nos.4 and 5 ther,rby to dismantle the structures over the above said property. lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under section i 51 cpc praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High cor rt may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 and 3 to take actron against 'he rllegal construction made by the Respondent No 4 and 5 as per the report dated .13.0.2023 before this Hon'ble Court. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petrtion, the High cou 1 may be pleased ro DIRECT the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to stop the furt rer construction work carrying out by Respondent Nos.4 and 5 over the premises bearing H.No.6-2-534 to 6-2-535, situated at Chinthala Basthi, Khairatabad, Hydeiabad. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI S.PRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Gp FOR MCpL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3 : SRI K.SIDDHARTH RAO, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.4&5 : SRI V.y.KRISHNA SAINATH -e--ry W.P.No.16493 OF 2024 Between: Chapala Mahender, S/o.Chapala Bikshapathi, Aged 45 yrs, Occ. Private Employee, R/o.H.No.6-2-534l1, Chinthala Basthi, Khairathabad, Hyderabad-500 004 ...PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Secretariat, Hyderabad. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Lower Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad Represented by its Commissioner, 2 3 4 5 b Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, GHMC Circle No.XVll, Kharrathabad, Hyderabad. The Asst.City Planner. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, GHMC Circle No.XVll, Khairathabad. Hyderabad. Chapala Amarnath, S/o. Ch. Bashaiah, Aged about 66 yrs,Occ. Business, R/o.H.No.6-2-534 to 6-2-535, Chinthala Basthi, Khairathabad, Hydreabad-500 004 Chapala Ashok Kumar, S/o Ch.Bashaiah, Aged about 69 yrs. Occ. Business, R/o H.No.6-2-534 to 6-2-535, Chinthala Basthi, Khairathabad. Hydreabad-500 004 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in tne affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the construction made at H.No.6-2-534 and 535, Chinthal Basthi, Khairathabad, Hyderabad by the 5th and 6th respondents in deviation of the sanctioned plan, as illegal, contrary to law, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to demolish the illegal construction at H.No.6-2-534 and 535, Chinthal Basthi, Khairathabad, Hyderabad made in deviation of the sanctioned plan. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To direct the official respondents 2 to 4, to stop further illegal construction works -,!E carried out by the respondents 5 and 6 at H.No.6-2-534 an j 535, Chinthal Basthi, Khairathabad, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI NADELLA VENKATESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : GP FOR MCPL ADTVIN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondents No.3&4 : SRt K.SIDDHARTH RAO, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondents No.5&6 : SRI pRAVEEN KUtvlAR DUBEY The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER /I r-') HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.23638 OF2023 and16493 of 2024 COMMON ORDER: (oRAL) Since the issue involved in both these writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order W.P. No.23638 of 2023: This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent No.3 in not initiating any action against the unauthorized construction underlaken by respondents No'4 and 5 in respect of the premises bearing H.No.6-2-534 afi 6-2-535, situated at Chinthala Basthi, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, without maintaining any setbacks, despite the petitioner submitting representations dated 24.05-2023, 1,3.06.2023 and

22.08.2023, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. W.P. No.I6493 of 2024: This writ petition is lileci by the petitioners seeking to declare the action of the respondent authorities in not taking any action against the illegal construction made by respondents No.5 and 6 in respect of the premises bearing H.No.6-2-534 and 6-2-535, situated at Chinthala Basthi, 2 ,.:. Khairatabad, Hyderabad, in deviation of the sanctionerl plan, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; L:amed Standing Counsel for GHMC, appearing for ofhcial respondents; and perused the material on record.

5. Pursuant to the order dated 28.08.2023 passed ry this Court in W.P. No.23638 of 2023,learned Standing Counsel for (}I{N{C placed on record report dated 13.09.2023 and submitted that or receipt of the complaint dated 24.05.2023 from the petitioners with regard to the unauthorized construction in the subject premises, the s te was inspected by the GHMC officials and it was noticed that the unoflicial respondents obtained building permission for construction of Stilt + 2 floors; they made deviations as against the sanctioned plan ard laid slabs for Stilt + 2 upper floors without maintained any mar'datory setbacks. I i The unofficial respondents have also made constructior. in the proposed road widening portion and further raised 3'd and 4fi loors. Pursuant thereto, show cause notice dated 29.05.2023 was issuec to the unofllcial respondents and later, speaking order dated 21.06.2C23 was passed directing them to remove the unauthorized structules. Aggrieved w 3 thereby,theunofficialrespondentsfiledO.S.No'3488of2023beforethe leamed IV Junior Civil Judge' City Civil Courl, Hyderabad (for short .trialCourt,)whereinorderdated20.oT.2023waspassedinI.A.No.l29I of 2023 in O.S. No.3488 of 2023 directing both the parties therein to maintain status quo in respect of the subject property'

6. Learned Standing Counsel for GHMC submitted that in view of the said status quo order, no action, as of now, has been taken' That as and when the interim order is vacated, fufiher action will be taken' Leamed counsel for the petitioners submitted that order dated 7 . 22.09.2023 was passed by the trial Court dismissing l'A' No 1291 of 2023 thereby vacating the status quo order daLed20'07 '2023'

8. Mr. V.Y. Krishna Sainath, leamed counsel' stated that he filed Vakalat on behalf of respondents No'4 and 5 in W'P' No'23638 of 2023 but he has given up his Vakalat' Mr' Praveen Kumar Dubey entered appearance on behalf of respondents No'5 and 6 in W'P' No'16493 of

2024. However, today, there is no representation on his behalf'

9. Considering the fact that the status quo order dated 20'07'2023 passed by the trial Court was vacated and l'A' No'1291 of 2023 in t 4 O.S. No.3488 of 2023 was dismissed, these writ perition; arc disposed of directing respor-rdent No.3 - the Deputy comrni.sioner. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, to implement the spcaking order dated 21.06.2023, within a period of four (4) weeks tiom the dare of receipt ofa copy of this order. There sha[ be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, i1 an1,, pending in the writ petition stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// SD/-S. !\'IALLIKARJUNA RAO REGISTRAR ('Y1l', I i secrr ON OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Department of lt/lunici Aominrstration and Urban Development Secretariat, State Of Telangana, Hydera:;ad

2. The Commissioner Greater Hyderabad ltrlunicipal C >rporatron, Lower Tank Bund Road . Hyderabad.

3. The Deputy Commissroner, Greater Hyderabad Munic pal Corporatron, Circle- XVll, Khairatabad. Hyderabad.

4. The Asst.City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, GHMC Circle No.XVll, Khairathabad Hyderabad.

5. One CC to SRI S.PRABHAKAR REDDY, Advocate [C]PUCI 6. One CC to SRI NADELLA VENKATESWARA RAO, Arlvocate. IOPUC] 7 Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL AD[/N URBAN DEV. Hi( h Court for the State of Telangana [OUT] B One CC to SRI K SIDDHARTH RAO, SC FOR GHN4C [OPUC] 9 One CC to SRI V.Y.KRISHNA SAINATH, Advocate. [CTPUC] 10 One CC to SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR DUBEY, Advocate. [OPUC] 1 1 . Two CD Copies. BSK BS \ I :lE l ,Oi€ (n( t IJUN 2U5 a, - ^, .,,-.' ,.-1, ' r./ HIGH COURT DATED:1110612025 J \IJ t COMMON ORDER WP.No.23638 of 2023 & WP.No.16493 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS wlblar