High Court · 2025

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleasedtoissueanappropriateWrit,orderorDirectionmoreparticularlyinthe nature of writ of MANDAITiIUS declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not removingtheillegalconstructionsmadebytheunofficialrespondentsintheland of sy.Nos.1011, .1076 and 1077 of Kashmeergadda, Karimnagar Town and District as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of provisions of Municipal corporation Act and also violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution of lndia and consequenfly direct the res of illegal constructions 1076 and 1077 of Kashmee IA NO: OF 20 1 24 pondents 2 to 4 to take appro e by the qnofficial respondents rgadda, Karimnagar Town and also to pay costs. priate action for removal at land of Sy.Nos. .t 01 1, petition under Se( the affidavir o,"o ,.l,rlri""n the respondents 2 to ]n:t"'',u representations o"t"o zo ^] - o8-2o24in accordance *,,:'.'roro, t'*" 151 cPc pravins thar i petition' ;";;;'J" "o",n"u'"n-o'n erct );n*, ,;;nt' th law, pendins.";.;:rt the circumstances stated in may be pleased to direct action pursuant to the and 27- T?,i'r3i.ZI:',r, Counsel for the petitioner t*',ADLAK.NDA )nt Nos.1 and 3: Gp FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV RAVI K,MAR REDD' Gounser for the Responr," Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Responde The Court made the following: ORDER ",lB?Alll,fi 5 i,?I .o * RA'o N "o # Isf ,&T,[ rl) THEHON'BLE SRIJUSTICE I<. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No. 25456 ot 2024 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Sri K' Siddarth Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel for Karimnagar Municipal Corporation appearing for 4'h respondent'

2. Despite service of notice, none appears for respondent Nos.5 and 6.

3. Perusal of the record would reveal that on the legal notice dated 06.12.2023 got issued by petitioner alleging that respondent Nos.5 and 6 were proceeding with the construction of a function hall under the name and style of 'IBA Garden Function Hall' without obtaining any permission from 4th respondent, vide order clatcd 29 05'2024' 4'h respondent directed respondent Nos.5 ancl 6 to remove the said unauthorized construction within tllteen (15) days' failing which, action will be taken by them in accordance with law' According to petitioner, 4'i' resptlndeut demolished the said function hall paftly otr 04-01 .2024. However, I I I I I l ) i ! I I j 2 4'h respondent is not proceeding furth challenging the said action of 4rh respondent, the present Writ petition. *.. *" rro"u .,fl;i er. Therefore, petitioner filed 4 Learned Standing Counsel appearing for 4,h respondent, rnstructions, would submit that 4,h respondent will rmplement the order dated 29.05.2024 by demolishing rhe entire unauthorized strucfure in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 (for short 'the Acr')

5. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that respondent Nos.5 and 6 have filed Writ Petition No.2g074 of 2024 challenging rhe order dated 29.05.2024. Vide ord,er dated 04.10.2024, thisCourt disposed ol-the said Writ petition granting liberty to respondenr Nos.-5 and 6 to submit explanation within seven (7) days and directing 4'r' respondent to consider the said explanation and pass a speaking order afresh before taking any further action in the ntattcr. pursuant to the said order of this Court. respondent Nos.-S 211d 6 have submitted explanation along with relevant ,d' 3 kr' 'r W.P-No 25456 olm24 \ \ documents on 1i'10'2024' Thereupon' +s resnol]e"::: respondent Nos'5 and passed order dated Oz'll'z[24directing 6 to vacate the subject function hall and remove the same within fifteen (15) days' Thereafter' challenging the said order dated 02'11'2024' respondent Nos'5 and 6 fited Writ Petition No.33225 of 2024'It is an appealabte order' Therefore' vide Court disposed of the said Writ order dated 25'02'2025'this Petition pemritting respondent Nos 5 and 6 to prefer an appeal before the Regionar Director/Appellare within ten (10) days from the date o[ receipt of copy of the said order and directing the said Regional Director/Appellate Authority to dispose of the same within sixty (60) days from the date of fiting of the said appeal Till then' the impugned order dated O2'll'2024 shall not be givcn eft'ect' This Court has also granted liberty to 2nd respondent to take action against respondent Nos.5 and 6 in accordance with law' if respondent Authority concerned Nos.5and6failtopreferanappealwithintlrcabovespecified tlme. \ \ 4 \ *.".^. ,toa. ., fot;i

6. I n the light of the above, rhis Writ petition directing 2nd is disposed of respondent to implement the order dated 29.05.2024 subject to the result of the appeal preferred by respondent Nos.5 and 6 challenging the order dated

02.1t.2024. Th ere shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.A. PRATHIMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR V SECTION OFFICER 1 . The Principal Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Telangana The State of Telangana, Secretariat at Hyderabad. District. Karimnagar District.

2. The District Collector, Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 3. The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Warangal, Warangal + ine Commissioner, The Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar' Karimnagar' 5 6; iCi; Sri-Vadlat<onda Ravi Kumar Reddv, Advocate [OPUC] , ^ 6 i;; 6cdt-ce toi naunicpai Administration Llrban Development Hish court , il; ;ii;'iri. c-i t,i n.i,"i'"i Hp6 court ro? ttre state or relansana' at t 'ciiJ 66 tiiSi k sioo"tn Reddv' sc for Karimnasar Municrpal 9. Two CD CoPies for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabadlou.ll ^ CorPoration[OPUC] Hvderabad IOUTI TJ GJP (r- i i To, J l l i j J t I I i i ! i l HIGH COURT DATED:04 tOttzO2S ORDER WP.No.254S6 of 2024 Ii\ TFIE S t ( 1 I JUL 2025 { '", r'ilp,( ) v / I I i I l I' i j l t I I I l i : I i I : i i r I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (P- Lo L,{