Smt. Soppari Nagarani v. 1. State of Telangana

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 writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of certiorari and call for records and quash the order passed by the Respondent No.6 vide order styled as Revocation of House Permission Notice No.03/GPRPT/2O25, dated 1010712025, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles '14 and 300- A of the Constitution of lndia and apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with the construction activity of the Petitioner. l.A.NO:'1 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 Suspend the operation of the Order passed by the Respondent No.6 vide Order styled as Revocation of House Permrssion Notice No.03/G PRPT/2025, dated 1010712025, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI PAPAIAH PEDDAKULA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.'l, 3 & 4 : GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Gounsel forthe Respondent No.2: G.P FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6 : SRI K.PRADEEP REDDY, SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT The Court made the following ORDER I :, I : I T THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRI T PETITION No.21973 of 2025 ORDER This Writ Petition is hled seeking Writ of Certiorari to call for the records and quash the order bearing No.03/GPRPT/2025 dated 10.07.2025 passed by respondent No.6 revoking the house permission granted in favour of the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel fbr the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was granted construction permission vide proceedings No.35l/BP/2024 dated 20.09.2024 to construct a house in Sy.No.6l5 admeasuring 167.44 square yards situated at Police Station Area, Ramannapet Village and Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, and he has accordingly made the construction and therealter, a notice dated 12.03.2025 was issued to the petitioner requiring him to stop the construction activity. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner thereafter made a representation dated 08.04.2025 and without considering the same, the impugned order dated 10-07.2025 has been passed revoking the building permission granted in favour of the I 2 TMDJ wp 21,973 2025 a-{.i ,i ..ni .r1 ,:. petrtroner. I_earned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the impugncd orcler was passed without giving any prior notice and is therefore rn violation of the principles olnatur:rl justice.

3. Sri K. pradeep Reddy. Ieamcd Standing Counsel fbr Gram Panchayat, appearing fbr respondents No.5 & 6, submitted that a notice has bcen issuecl ro thc petitioner and thc petitioner also submitted his explanation and rt rs only thereafter that the tmpugned oxlcr has been passcd. Lcarned Standing Counsel further subnritted that there is a provision of appcal belore the District Collcctor-respondent No.2 and that the 1;etitioner has approached tltis Courl without availing the said alternative remedy

4. Ifavin,rl regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and on perusal of the irnpugned order, it rs noticed that though there is a reference to the notice dated 12.03.2025, respondent No.6 has neither referred to the same in the subjective portion nor stated that no explanation was submitted by the petitioner' Fur1,er, the notice dated 12.03.2025 does not pcrlain to I 3 TM D] wp 21973 2OZ5 the revocation of the construction permission granted in favour of the petitioner. Though the leamed counsel for the petitioner has refened to an explanation dated Og.O4.ZO25 submitted by the petitioner, leamed Standing counser has rightly pointed out that the said explanation/representation was not addressed to respondent No.6, but was addressed to District panchayat Officer_respondent No.3 and the Revenue Divisional Officer and as the copy ol the said representation was not marked to the panchayat Secretary_ respondent No.6, there was no occasion for respondent No.6 to consider it. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined ro set aside the impugned order dated lO.Oj.2OZ5 issued by respondent No.6 and grant liberty to the petitioner to submit a lresh representation within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Respondent No.6 shall thereafter consider the same and pass appropriate orders, after issuing notices to all the affected parties, if necessary. Respondent No.6 is also at liberty to issue a fresh notice and take further action in accordance with law. t I I i I I \ ;ii, riii'-t 4 TMDJ wp _21973 _2025

5. With the above rlirections, this Writ Petition is clisposed of. There shall be no order as to costs

6. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall srand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.A. SRINIVASA REDOY ,/ TANT REGTSTRAR A r \ '{ SECTION OFFICER -- ---- '1 . The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural DJelopment Department' Secretanai Buildings, Saifabad, State of Telangana at Hyderabad'

2. The District Collect,cr, Yadadri -Bhuvanagiri District at Bhongir. 3. The District Panchayat Officer, Yadadri- Bhuvanagiri District at Bhongir' 4. The Drvisional Panc-hayath officer, choutuppal, Yadadri- Bhuvanagiri District. 5. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Ramannapet i\4andal, Yadadri- 6. The Secr6tary, Ramannapet Gram Panchayat, Ramannapet lr/andal, Yadadri- Bhuvanagiri District. Bhuvanagiri District.

7. Two CCs"to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPfi/ENT, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

9. Ohe CC to SRI PAPAIAH PEDDAKULA, Advocate [OPUC] 10 One CC to SRI K PRADEEP REDDY, SC FOR GRATV PANCHAYAT' Advocate (OPUC) 1 I . Two CD Copies SA GJP G I To HIGH COURT DATED:2910712025 ORDER WP.No.21973 of ZO2S THE S14 .a /'( )R I (1 2E IUBU z D ,+ * p4TC DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. f 'l/-, &6I' I I I i