Mohd. Naveem Khan v. state of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia 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 particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action of the respondents 3 and 4 and their officials in interfering with construction activity of the petitioner over the tand bearing No.2-6-7lJC/ll/433/P (PTIN No.1110242920) admeasuring 200 Sq yards, under Sy.No.'104, situated at Budwel Village' Rajendranagar Mandal' Ranga Reddy District, which is carrying out strictly in accordance with sanctioned ptan vide permit No.478231l1311IGHMCI2Oz' daled14.02.2025, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, u nconstitutiona l, violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the provisions of GHMC Act, 1955 and rules made thereunder, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with construction activity of the petitioner over subject property, which is carrying out strictly in accordance with sanctioned plan, without following due procedure as r;ontemplated under law. lA NO: 'l OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to direct the respondents herein and their subordinates n()t to interfere with construction activity of the petitioner over the land bearing plot No.2-6-7lJCl11l433lP (PTIN No.1110242920) admeasuring 200 Sq. yards, under Sy.No.104, situated at Budwel Village, Rajendranagar Mandal. Ranga Reddy District, which is carrying out strictly in accordance with sanctioned plan vide permit No.478231 I 1 31 1 lcHMCl2025 dated 1 4.02.2025, pending disposat of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt MOHD MOIN AHMED eUADRt Counsel for the Responilent No.1: cP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI RAPARTHY VENKATESH, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR HOME WRIT PETITION NO: 1 6828 0F 2025 Between: Saeed Occ. Bus Khan Pathan, S/o Mir Khan Pathan aqed iness. Rio.H No.22-2-246. Purani Haveli, Hyd"era about 38 years, Dad ...PETITIONER AND

1. 2 J 4 State.of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Muricipal Administration and Urban Development Ddpartment, Secretariat, Hyderabab. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Having office at Tankbund Road, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Municipal Commissioner. - Qreater Hyderabad Municipal ^Corporation Circle 11, Rajendranagar, R.R.District, Rep by its Assistant City planner The Station House Officer, Rajendranagar police Station, R.R.District. ...RESPONOENTS 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 rssue a writ. order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action of the respondents 3 and 4 and their officials in interfering with construction activity of the petitioner over the Iand bearing plot No.2-6-7lJcllll433 (PTIN No.1110242921) admeasuring 200 Sq. yards, under Sy.No.104, situated at Budwel Village. Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which is canyin.2 out strictly in accordance with sanctioned plan vide permit No.478241 I 1310lGHMCl2025 dated.l 4.02.2025, is illegal, arbitrary, un.lust, u nconstitutional, violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the provisions of GHMC Act, 1955 and rules made thereunder, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with construction activity of the petitioner over subject property, which is carrying out strictly in accordance with sanctioned plan, without following due procedure as contemplated under law. lA NO: 'f OF 2025 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 respondents herein and their subordinates not to interfere with construction activity of the petitioner over the land bearing plot No.2-6- 7/JC/ll/433 (ElE! No.1110242921) admeasuring 20o Sq. yards, under SyNo'104, .i,tE at Buck\ e'Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddv District, which is-carrying out strict in accordance with sanctioned plan vide permit No.47B241t131O|GHMC|2025 daled. 14.02.2025, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI RAPARTHY VENKATESH' Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER SC FOR GHMC THE HONOT]RABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSIIN REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.l6808 AND 16828 OF 2025 COMMON ORDER: (ORAL) Since common issue is involved in both the writ petitions, with the consent of the both sides, they are being disposed of by this common order, at the stage of admission itself.

2. Mr. Raparthy Venkatesh, learned standing counsel for the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC). appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, placed on record the written instructions received from the Assistant City Planner, Rajendranagar Circle -11, \ I Charminar Zone, and submifted that the subject properties of the petitioners were inspected by the GHMC officials, where it was observed that petitioners have constructed two (2) tin shed rooms with compound wall on 400 square yards of land. The allegation that work undertaken by the petitioners was stopped by the GHMC officials on 16.06.2025 is false. The GHMC officials neither visited the sites ,$.ru"O any notice to the petitioners. Petitjoners have not commenced any construction after obtaining building permission. _-1 -,

3. Recording the aloresald submissions of the leamed standing counsel for GHMC, these writ petitions are disposed of, directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to interfere with the subject property of the petitioners, without following due process of law. Further, the petitioners are directed not to undertake any construction in deviation of the sanctioned building plan. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in these writ petitions stand closed. F. //TRUE COPY// SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL UTY REGISTRAR DEP SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The PrinciPal Secretary, lvluniciP al Administrati Department , Secretariai, Hyderabad, State of Telan and Urban DeveloPment gana.

2. The Municipal Commissroner' Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation' - Having officb at Tankbund Road, Hyderabad' 3.TheAssistantCityPlanner,GreaterHyderabadMunicipalCorporationCircle 1 1, Ralendranagar, R.R District

4. The Station House Officer, Rajendranagar Police Station' R R District' 5. One CC to SRI MOHD MOIN AHMED QUADRI, Advocate IOPUC] 6. One CC to SRI RAPARTHY VENKATESH, SC FOR GHMC [OPUC] T.TwoCCstoGPFORMCPLADMNURBANDEV,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana at HYderbad [OUT] B. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

9. Two CD CoPies BSR BS I HIGH COURT DATED:1910612025 ( e J o 1rE ST47' €' ( 2 E Jl.ri{ ,0f t D COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.16808 and 16828 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF BOTH THE WRIT PETITIONS, WITHOUT COSTS ae 6lad