1. Sri Panjala Ramanjaneyulu v. 1. The State of Telangana

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI J.P.SRIKANTH Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : SRI p.KISHORE RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.S & 7 : SRI M.RAMGOPAL. RAO W.P.NO: 25565 OF 2022 Between:

1. Manduva Srisailam, S/o. Mallaiah, Aged 54 years, Occupation Agriculture, Rl/o. H.No. 4-6-'16, Hussainabad Village, Bibinagar l\Iandal, Nalgonda District. 2. lvlanduva Sathya Lakshmi, W/o. Srisailam, Aged 44 years, Occupation House wife, Rl/o. H.No. 4-6-16, Hussainabad Village, Bibinagar [\4andal, Nalgonda District .....PETITIONERS AND 'l . State Of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Panchayath Ral Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collectorate, Represented by its Collector, Yadadri-Bhongir District.

3. District Panchayath Office, Represented by its DPO., Yadadri-Bhongir District 4. The Gramapanchayath, Represented by its Secretary, Bibinagar Village, Bibinagar mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District.

5. Panjala Ramanjaneyulu, S/o. Shankaraiah, Aged 6'l years, Occupation Business, R/o. H.No. 6-14111, Bibi Nagar Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Yadadri- Bhongir District.

6. Ittleesala Baswaiah, S/o. Sathaiah, Aged 60 years, Occupation Business, Rl/o. Padamati Somaram Village, Bibinagar [ti{andal, Yadadri-Bhongir District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of lh'e Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particular) one in the nature of writ of fi/andamus to the declare the inaction ( Respondents No.2,3 and 4 for considering Complaints, date 26.02.2022, 03.03.2022 and 07.05.2022 respectively and taking action for the illegal construction of the unofficial respondents No.5 and without having permission, constructing mulgies over the writ petitioner No.1 and 2s properties i.e. Plot No. 33/A and 33/8, admeasuring 200 sq. yards and 410 sq. yards, respectively, in Sy. No.596 of Bibi Nagar Village and Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequentially direct the Respondents No.2 and 4 to consider the complaints dated 26.O2.2022, 03.O3.2022 and 07.05.2022 respectively and take action, for the illegal construction of the unofficial respondents No.5 and 6, over the writ petitioners No.1 and 2s properties i.e. Plot No. 33/A and 33i8, admeasuring 200 sq. yards and 410 sq. yards, respectively, in Sy. No. 596 of Bibi Nagar Village and Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongrr District. l.A.NO:1 OF 2022 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the petition, the High Cou{ may be pleased to issue interim directions on the Respondents No. 2, 3. and 4 to consider the complaints, dated 26.02.2022, 03.03.2022 and 07.05.2022 respectively and take action, for the illegal construction of the unofficial respond,,>nts Nr:.5 and 6, over the writ petitioners No.1 and 2's properties i.e. Plot No. 33/A and 33/B, admeasuring 200 sq. yards and 410 sq. yards, respectively, in Sy. No. 596 of Bibi Nagar Village anC I\/andal, Yadadri-Bhongir District- Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI J.P.SRIKANTH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR PANCHAYAT I1AJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : G.P FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI M.RAM GOPAL RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : SRI P.KISHORE RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : SRI G.NARENDER REDDY The Court made the following COMMON ORDER :t'&*}*i.; THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI W.P.NOs. 236o,0 AND 25565 OF 2o22 COMMON ORDER: W.P.No.2360O of 2022 In this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the respondents No.4 to 6 in demolishing the subject property on 06.O5.2022 and issuing the notice daled 27 .O4.2O22 and interfering with the construction work undertaken by the petitioners in the land admeasuring 223 sq.yards on Plot No.12/33 in Survey No.596, situated in the limits of Bibi Nagar Village and Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently to set asidc the notice dated 27 .O4.2O22 issued by the respondent No.5 and direct the respondents No.4 to 6 not to interfere r.l,ith the construction undertaken by the petitioners on the subject property and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of juslice.

2. Vide orders dated O9.O7 .2025 in I.A.No.O2 of 2022, the petitioner in W.P.No.25565 of 2O22, got impleaded S respondent No.7 in W.P.No.236OO of 2022 2

3. Brief facts leading to the filing of tlrc present rvrit petition arc that thc petilioners claim to be thc t:.bsolute o\.ncrs and possessors ol lhc open Plot No.12/33, a,lmeasuring an cxtent cf 45 i Sq.vards, cquivalent Lo 377.06 Sq.meters in Survey ltro.596, situatcd in the limits of Bibi Naqar Village and Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District, having jointly purctrasecl the same through registered salc deed bearing clocurnenL No.erO86,r2OO5, dated 02.12.2OOS from its absolut.c owner Mohd.Ifrrrnuddin, S/o.Late Mohd.Burhanuddin, .,vho had earlier purchaserd the same through regis[ered sale deeci beanng dcrcument No.127611984, dated 28.Oa.D84 fr,.rm irs original owners. it is submitted that after purchase of t he property by the petitioners, the Ciovernment has acquired at.L extent ol 22g Sq.vards. for u,idening the National High rvay-2 02 vicle ProccedirLgs No.B/ 169O/201O, datcd t4.12.2)t6 and rhc pctitioners rvere also pard the compensation acco r.dingl1, and the petiLione rs claims Lo be in possession of the rer.aining land to the extent of 223 Sq.1.21d5.

4. It is submitted that the petitior-re rs decided to construct a building in the said land and submitted an online applicaticn dated 02.1O.2O2I to the respondents No.S and 6 for 3 construction of a residential building for the ground floor by enclosing the copy of the sale deed along with thc link documents and proposed construction plan. It is submitted that the respondents No.5 and 6 having received the online application dated O2.10.2021, have allotted the application number and that the same was not reverted by the authorities within the prescribed time and therefore, the petitioners have given a notice dated 18.10.2021, intimating that thcy are procceding with the construction in accordance with the plan submitted for construction. Thereafter, the petitioners claim to have proceeded with the construction of the subject house. However, the respondent No.S has issued a notice to the petitioners on 27 .O4.2022, directing the petitioners to stop the construction and consequently the petitioners approachcd the respondents and explained about the pendency of their building application permission and also about the notice of commcncement of construction. It is submitted that the respondents No.4 to 6 started interfering with the petitioners construction work and stopped the constructron ot 27.O4.2022 after issuance of the rmpugned notice and on 06.05.2022 it is alleged that the respondents No.4 to 6 along with staff of the Gram Panchayat trespassed into the construction site and 4 without issuing any notice to them, have partir,rlll' demolished the side walls of their resiclential property and czrused :ruge loss to the pctitioners. Therefore, challenging tht: noticc datcd 27 .O4.2A2'2 and also dr:claration that the action cf dem,tlition on

06.05.202'2 as illegal and arbitrary, the present v.rit pel,ition has been file<.I.

5. Learned counscl for the petitioners submitted that demoliticn of the building is rvithout any issuancc of n,ttice and is clcarly in violatior-r of principles of naLural justice antl also an abuse of their powers under the panchayat Raj ,\ct. He further submitteC that when the application of the tr;etitioners was neither revcrted nor rejected within the prescr.ibed period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the appliczrtion i.e., dated O2.IO.2O'21, it shall bc deemed to have been approved and therefore the petitioncrs have proceeded v,,ith tLLe construction under th,: dcemed approvai provisions. IL is sub tnitted that all the relevzrnt documents, such as lhe registered s ztle dced along with link documents and thc proposed construc:ion plan wcre submitte <l along with online applicaLion of the l,etitioners and the Panchayat Secretary under Section 114 (3) of the Telangana State Panchayat Raj Act-2018, has to verify the dor:uments 5 submitted along with the application and if the permission application is not accompanied by required documents, such application shall be returned with the reasons in writing to the applicants within seven days and if no decision is taken within fifteen days, the approval will be deemed to have been given, if all the valid documents have been submitted to the Gram Panchayat. Since the respondents failed to point out any discrepancies in the building permission application of the petitioners and they have neither rejected nor returned it within fifteen days from the date of application, it shall be deemed to have been approved and the respondents ought not to have demolished the part of the property of the petitioners on

06.05.2022. He is therefore seeking an appropriate direction to the respondents not to interfere with the petilioners' construction of the property.

6. The lcarned standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 i.e., the Panchayat Secretary, Bibinagar Mandal, has filed a counter affidavit confirming that the petitioners were the owners ol the land in Plot No.12/33 in Survey No.596 and that part of the said land has been acquired by the Government for the purpose of widening the National 6 Highway and that the petitioners are in pos sessio n of the balance of the 1and. In respect of the ouline application submitted by the petitioners for building permiss ion, it is stated that the :etitioners have sought permission for cr.,nstrurction of a residential building for thc ground floor, whereirs a perusal of the copy of the proposed construction plan disrtloses that the construclion is being made of commercial shops. It is submitted that for r:onstruction of commercial shops, perm issions have lo be accorded by the respective technical sat'rcticrning authority i.e., HML)A in this casc. it is submitted that an arp.licarion for a residential building shall be made to the Gram Pi.nchavat in the prescribed format, duly submitting a cop1, to the technical sanctioning auLhority and the Gram Pancl rayat is only empowered to accord construction permisl;ions for al1 residential buildings with Ground+2 floors up to a height of 10 meters with a site area up to 300 Sq.meters only. It is submitted that after scrutiny of thc application, [he respond:nt No.6 found that the application is not in accordance witl r thc Act and therefore, it was reverted on 22.70.2021 on the g,round that the application is qwithout LRS'. It is submitted that -he mr:ssage of reversion has bccn senl to the mobile number of r_hc petitioners, which is registered in the citizen service of the e-pzrnchayat 7 website. It is further submitted that no intimation notice dated

18.10.2021 allegedly issued by the petitioners was received by the Gram Panchayat and that the said alleged intimation is created by the petitioners for the purpose of filing the present writ petition. It is further pointed out that the copy of the alleged intimation notice does not contain the signature of Panchayat Secre[ary to the effect of receiving it. It is submitted that in spite of reverting the permission application in the monfh of October 2021, the petitioners continued to make the construcLion and by noticing the same, the Gram panchayat issued a notice dated 27 .O4.2022 to stop the construction and when the petitioners failed to stop the construction, the unauthorized construction has been demolished on 06.O5.2022 under the powers vested in the Gram panchayat, under Section 114 of the Telangana State panchayat Raj Act. A copy of the screenshot of the webpage reverting the application of the petitioners with an endorsement fuithout LRS,, dateci 22.1O.2021 , is also filed along with the counter aflidavit and the notices dated 26.04.2022 and 22.O4.2O22 requiring the petitioners to stop the construction are also hled. 8

7. The respondent No.7 has relied uporL the averments made in the u,rit petition filed by him in W.P.No.25565 of 2022, challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents No.2 to 4 in considering the complaints of the petitioner s ther,:in dated

26.O2.2422, 03.O3.2022 and 07.05.2022 respcctivell, and in taking action against the illegal construction madc by the pctitioners herein i.c., the unofficial respondentsr No.5 and 6 in W.P.No.215565 of 2022 as illegal, arbitrary anc to pass such other orcier or orders.

8. In W.P.No.25565 of 2022, it is statc:l that the rvrit petitioners in W.P.No.2360O of 2022, wiLhorLl- having any permissi()n, started construction of mulgies over thc properly of the writ petitioners in W.P.No.25565 of 2O'22 i.e., in plot Nos.33/A and 33/B, admeasuring 2O0 Sq.y,rrds and 410 Sq.yards respectively in Survey No.596 of Bibi Nagar Village and Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District. It is stei red t.hat the petitioners have purchased the open plot No.33/l\, adm.easuring 2OO sq.yards in Survey No.596, through a regist(rred Sale Deed No.2953/2005, dated 22.06.2005 and open plot \o.33/B, admeasuring 410 sq.yards in Survey No.59b, rhrough a registered Sale Deed No.295212OO5, dated 22.06 2OO5 and that 9 they are in possession of the same since the date of purchase. It is stated that the petitioners as well as the respondents are neighbouring plot owners and that after the acquisition of a certain part of the land by the Government for widening of the road, the respondents are left with 323 Sq.yards only ancl in the guise of the same, the respondents are ttying to interfere and encroach into the peacelul possession and enjoyment of the petitioners plots. It is submitted that the petitioners have filed a suit for perpetual injunction before the principal Junior civil Judge at Bhongir vide O.S.No. 166 of 2016 and, the same is pending consideration. It is submiLted that the petitioners have also filed a criminal complaint against the responclents, which is registered as FIR No.297 /2021, dated 23. 17.2021, for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 422 r/w 34 IpC, for the illegal construction of mulgies over the petitioners property. the petitioners also relied upon the information Further, by the Gram panchayat, Bibinagar, under the RTI the application for building permission by the respondents has been rejected and therefore, the have made complaints before the District Officer, Yadadri-Bhongir District, for illegal on 25.02.2022 & 03.03.2022 and consequently, furnished Act, that unoffrcial petitioners Panchayath construction 10 the staff of the Gram Panchayat have demolisheri the liont side portion of the unofficial respondents building and later kept quiet for reasons best known to them. Challenging the inaction on the p'alt of the respondents, the Writ Petition No.25565 of 2022 ha:; bccn filed.

9. Learned counse.l for the petitioners ir W.P.No.25565 of 2022 has also relied upon the copies of registr,:red s:rle deeds filed thcreu,ith to prove the title of thc pctitioners. 1O Learned counsel appcaring for th,.: rcsl)ondents No.5 ancl 6 in W.P.No.25565 of 2022 lnave filec] their counter aflrdavits reiterating the stand taken in W.P.No.2i:600 ol 2022. 1 1, A11 the parties have rciterated th submi ssions made by them in their respective affrdavits.

12. Lcarned counsel for the wiit :etiLioners in W.P.No.25565 of 2022 submitted that the writ pctitioners in W.P.No.23600 of 2022 were owners of open 1rlot No.12,/33, admeasuring 451 Sq.yards in Survey No.596, s;rtuated in the limits of Bibinagar Village and Mandal, Yadadri-E hongrr- District and out ,:f the same orrly 228 Sq.meters were ar:quire,C by the Governrnent and not 228 square yards and therefbre, the 11 petitioner_s were left only with 179 Sq.yards, as against 223 Sq.yards, claimed by them. When the same was pointed out, the learned counsel for the petitioners rn W.P.No.23600 of 2022, after consultation qrith his clients, who were present in the Court room, confirmed that it is 22g Sq.meters, which has been acquired and there was an inadvertent mistake committed at the time of drafting of the r,rzrit petition, wherein it is mentioned that 228 Sq.yards have been acquired by the covernment. However, he has pointed out from the building application submitted by them that the proposed construction was only in 65.48 Sq.meters and not in 179 Sq.meters, as alleged by the respondent No.7 in W.p.No.236O0 of 2022.lt is submitted that the petitioners were constructing strictly in accordance with the plan submitted Ior construction and that the construction rvas made under the deeming provisions.

13. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the Writ petitioners in W.P.No.236OO of 2022 made an application for building permission on O2.7O.2O2I and have enclosed all the relevant documents. Under Section 113 of the Gram panchayat Act, the application has to be either reverted within a period of seven i I I I i I i I t2 days or ;:ejected within a period of fifteen days l om the date of receipt of an application and if the same has n()L been done, it shall be deemed to have been approved. Accordit'rg lo l-he Gram Panchayat, lhe application has been reverted rn 22.IO.2O2| i.c., afte r a period of twenty days and therefor,:, thc decming provisiorr for building permission would come inlo play. Though the petit:.oners claim to have intimated to the res.)ondents about the comrncncement ol construction, the said cert ificatc does nct possess the endorsement of the authorities anci therefore. the sarne canrot be taken into consideration in Lol.o as absolute. Thc rcsp,ondents, having issued a notice dated 27 .O4,2O22 for stopping the construction, ought to have called lor documents from the petitioners and if it were not satirtfied u,ith the documerrts so furnished, then it cught to havc issuecl anotl-rer noticc frrr removal of the unauthorized construction, failing which, dernolition is to take place. Admittedly, -ro su,rh notice was given in this case and therefore, it is in clear violat;.on of the principles of natural justice. However, it is also r:oteworthy that the properties of the writ petitioners and the unofficial respondfrnts are adjacent to each other and therefore, the possibilily of the petitioners encroaching intr I land of the I ' I 13 unofficial respondents while making the construction cannot be ruled out.

14. Further, when the petitioners have made an application for construction of a residential building' they could not have constructed a commercial building and therefore' the action on the part of the Gram Panchayat is warranted' Since the part of the building has already been demolished bv the respondents and in the interest of justicc' this Corrrt deems it fit the District Panchayat Officer i e ' the and ProPer to direct W.P.No.236OO of 2022 to look into the respondent No.3 in representations of the writ petitioners in W'P'No 25565 of 2022 and verify the facts mentioned therein and thereafter take a decision on the building constructed by t'he petitioners The petitioners have not challenged the reversion order dated 22.10.2021. Therefore, after verification' if it is lound that the petitioners constmction is within their property limits' only then the respondents shali give the petitioners an opportunity to submit the relevant documents and thereafter consider their application for building permission' Further' if it is found that the writ petitioners in W'P'No'236OO of 20t22 are in the land of unoflrcial respondents, then they shall take appropriate Steps in * * 74 accordal-rce with law for removal of the unauthorizecl constru<;tion 15 . With these directions, both the wr it pctr.tions are disposed of. There shall bc no order as to costs.

76. Misceilaneous petitions, if any, pending in thcse writ petil-ions, shall stand closecl. Note : That the case number read at bottom se-qond line rirer:lii{f,;*ir*i:[{*,"l";*:ri#rl^l.f ll; SD/-A.V.S. PRASAD DEPUTY REGISTRAR iliii Fh'"Tsi.* 3}?i;f;"1*si"s', .. fli,'{: i",=J3ili:.Y t tfr; lli,;l'rml ff 5il3.i;;'# ixt i tl-".'rlzirzs in wP.No.25565 or 2o22' ^ ;' "L".'ii:"ffix']i'",:,1;Hx;'li$:l:ttr;,:illf ( "ffi //TRUE COPY// Sd/-A.V.S.PRASAD PUTY REGISTRAR N OFFICER To

1. The PrinciP al SecretarY, PanchaY at Raj and Rural \,1 elopment, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, State of Telangana at HYdera bad 2. The District Collector, Yadadri Bhongir District 3. Tne Dittti"t PanchaY at Officer, Yadadri Bhong ir Distr ct 4 The lV'landal PanchaYa t Officer, Bibi Nagar lvland al Yadadri Bhong 5. The Panchaya t Secreta ry, Gram PanchbYath, Bibi Nagar Bitci Nagar Mandal, 6. The Panchayat SecretarY, Gram Pancha yath -Bibi N agar Bibi Nagar Mandal, 7. Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURII.L DEVELOPMENT, Hish 8. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Cou rt foathe S tate of Telangana at Yadadri Bhong ir District Erstwhil e Nalgonda District Yadadri Bhongi r District Erstwhil e Nalgo nda District Cou't for the State of Telangana at Hydera bad. [oU ] ir District I l l{i:: H tn ti tiH'+r:mffiq:li':re'Tx.r ::'

13. Two CD CoPies SA BS I a I HIGH COURT DATED:2310712025 l I I AMENDED COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.23600 AND 25565 of 2022 ( q ) l\ \ 'c \- -/j==:--'=-\ - .'st s'r,r;i-\- - c7.:'. ,,\ .. ':\( 16 sEP 206 '-\:: - -/. DISPOSING OF THE BOTH WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS.