The High Court · 2025

Petitlon under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circrrmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court nay be pleased to suspend the impugned Orders passed by Respondent No.2 seeking to revoke Building Permit No.61 10/GHIVC/KHB 12O24-BP dt. 16107l202tl p assed vide File No. 00982 1 /G H MC t 487 4 t KH B 1 I 2023 I 1 464 dt. 1 2.09.2025 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B. NALIN KUMAR, SENIOR C()UNSEL FOR SRIT. RAHUL Counsel for Respondent No. 1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMIItIISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4: SRI MIDDE ARUN KUl/tAR, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for Respondent No. 5: SRI V. RAVI KIRAN RAO, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR Ms. SARITHA RANI The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28638 OF 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the [ollowing relief: ". . . to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in thc nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 hcrein in issuing impugned Orders vide File No.009821/GHMC/4874 /KI1Bll2023/1464 dt. 12.09.2025 seeking to revoke the Building Permit No.6ll0/CHMC/KIfB/2024-BP dt: 16.07.2024 and action of Respondent No.4 issuing a Noticc of Sealing vide Lr.No.225ITPS/DC/Cl8|KZ/GHMC/2025 dr]. 15.09.2025 and on the same day sealing the property bearing H.No. 8-2-393lC, Sy.No.219 & 220 (old); New Sy No:391; TS No: 4,6,19 & 2lll; Block'E'; Ward No: ll situated in Road No. 5, Banjara Hills, Hydcrabad for a total extent ol 1222 sq. yds; as bcing illegal, arbitrary. discriminatory and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300 - A of the Constitution of India and ultra vires the powers of Respondent Nos.2 and 4, mala-fide and utter violation of ['rinciples of Natural Justice and pass... "

2. Heard Mr. B. Nalin Kumar, leamed senlor counsel, appearing for Mr. T. Rahul, leamed counsel for the petitioner, / ti:--!'! 2 Mr. Midde Arun Kumar, learned standing counsel tbr the GHMC, appearing lor respondent Nos.2 to 4, and Mr. V. Rr.v, Kiran Rao, learned senior counsel, appearing for Ms. Saritha Rani, learned counsel lbr respondent No.5

3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was granted building pr'rmission in Fite No.6l l0/C[{MC/KI1B12-24-BP dated l(t 0t.2024 by respondent No.2 in accordance with the provisions of the TG-bPASS Act, on being satisfied with the prima.fir:itt title of the petitioner. While the petitioner was proceeding with the construction of building, the Station House Officer (S HO), Banjara Hitls Police Station, under the influence of responden, l,lo.5 tried to interfere with thc possession of the petitioner over the subject property. As such, he filed W.P. No.32948 of 21t2. and order dated 22.11.2024 was passed by this Court directinE. the SHO, Banjara Hills, not to interfere with the possession ol' the petitioner over the subject property without following due proc:ss of law Despite the samc, rcspondent No.5 continued to interl'er e and deter the petitioner fiom proceeding with the construcr-ic n activity. 3 ln that connection, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 195 19 of 2025 before this Court, which is pending.

4. It is submitted that respondent No.5 filed W.P. No. 14792 of 2025 before this Court seeking direction to respondent Nos.l to 3 therein to consider his representation dated 21 .02.2025 regarding title of the subject property, wherein, interim order was passed in l.A. No.l of 2025 in W.P. No.14792 of 2025 directing respondent No.2 therein to take action on the representation of respondent No.5 dated 21.02.2025. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.2 conducted hearings on 31.05.2025, 21.06.2025, 12.07.2025 and

19.07.2025. However, respondent No.2 exceeded his jurisdiction AS envisaged under Section 450 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955 (for short 'GHMC Act') and accepted the fake documents created by respondent No.5. The petitioner filed W.P. No.20816 of 2025 challenging the letter issued by respondent No.2 in Lr.No.009821lGHMCl4874 lKHBll2123lll78 dated 14.07.2025, whereby, the building permission granted in favour of the petitioner was kept abeyance. Another writ petition in W'P. No.20841 of 2025 was I t 4 filed by the petitioncr challenging the letter issued b1 respondent No.2 vide I-r.No.00982 I lGHMCl4874/KIIBI /20231 I 179 dated

14.07.2025 to conduct the joint survey without io lowing due process of [aw, and both the writ petitions are pending

5. It is submitted that respondent No.2 issuel show-cause notice vide t-r.No.00982 I lclIMC|4874/KLIBI12023 1463 dated

12.09.2025 seeking cxplanation from the petitione r vrithin seven (7) days. However. on the same date i.e., 12.09.202'.;, orders were passed in F i te No. 009 8 2 I I GHli4.C I 487 4 IKIIB 1 12023 I | 4 64 revoking the building permission, and both the parties (p'et itioner and respondent No.5) were directed to approach Civil Court for redressal of their grievance.

6. [t is stated that respondent No.4 issued r lelter vide Lr.No.225/TI'S/DC/CIRI S/KZ (;HMC/2025 dated I 5 09.2025 to the petitioner calling upon him to submit explanation w thin fifteen (15) days as to why the unauthorized constructio r is being continued after revocation o[ building permission :md why the same should not be removed/demolished depiLrtmentally Further, the petitioner was directed to stop construr:tion activity ,v 5 immediately. The petitioner was directed to appear before respondent No.4 on 24.09.2025. However, on the same day, respondent No.4 issued show-cause notice vide Notice No.235lTPS/DC/Cl8/KZlGInvICl2025 dated t5.09.2025 to the petitioner stating that he is proceeding with building permission alier his permission was revoked under Section 450 of the GHMC Act. 'l'hat, the petitioner has made unauthorized construction consisting of Cellar + Stilt + four (4) upper floors after revocation of his buitding permission, and he was also informed that his property will be sealed.

7. I-earned senior counsel submitted that impugned proceedings are in violation of principles of natural justice and also the provisions of the GHMC Act. Two (2) show-cause noticcs/letters i.e., 12.09.2025 and 15.09.2025 were issued calling upon the petitioner to submit explanation and on the same dates i.e., 12.09.2025 and 15.09.2025, another show-cause notice/letter were issued by concluding that the building in unauthorized and wilt be sealed, which shows that there is non-application of mind. Hence, the impugned proceedings are illegal and unsustainable. 6

8. Mr. V. Ravi Kiran Rao, leamed senior counsel. rLppearing for respondent No.5, submitted that the petitioner doe:r rrot have any title to the subject property; by misleading the GIilv,lrl authorities and by indulging in suppression and misrepresentat ion building permission was obtained by the petitioner. Assuming lhat there are irregularities in issuing the impugned letters dated 12.)9.2025 and

15.09.2025, the same does not alter the situation as the petitioner is claiming title to the property on the strength of agrr:ernent of sale and does not have registered title document, and the ,vr it petition is liable to be dismissed.

9. In the light of the above submissions and matr:rjal available on record, it is not necessary firr this Court to delve into the title of the petitioner and facts of the case. The limited gri :r, ance of the petitioner is that on 12.09.2025 and 15.09.2025. show-cause notices dated were issued and on the same day anothe - impugned letters/show-cause notice were issued. Having issue,l ;how-cause notices, it was incumbent upon respondent No.4 to await explanation from the petitioner, thereafter, orders shoulc have been passed. Prima ./acie, the impugned orders dated l2 0,).2025 and \ t 7

15.09.2025 are in violarion of principles of natural justice and without application of mind. Howe.yer, the grievance of respondent No.5 is that if impugned orders are set aside, then the petitioner taking undue advantage of the same, would go ahead with the construction.

10. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order of revocation in File No.009g2I/GHMC /4874/KIlBl/202311464 dated, 12.09.2025 and, also the notice of sealing vide Lr.No.225lTpS/DC/CIS/KZ/GHNICI}O25 dated

15.09.2025 in respect of the property bearing H.No.g_2_393/C, admeasuring 1222 square yards in Survey Nos.2l9 and 220 (old), (New Survey No.39l), T.S. No.4,6, 19 alltd 2I/1, Block E, Ward No. 1 l, situated at Road No.5, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. It is made clear that this court is not interfering with the show-cause notice vide Lr.No.00982UGLIN(C/4874/KItBt/2023/1463 dated

12.09.2025 and Notice No.235ITpS/DC1C|S/KZ/GLIMC/2025 dated 15.09.2025 issued by respondent No.4, as there is allegation against the petitioner that he does not have any title to the subject property, and that the executants of the gift deed based on which \-!-ft .l the building permission has been obtained do not 'tave any title. Pending adjudication of the disputes, pursuant to show-cause notices dated 12.09.2025 and 15.09.2025, status qtk/, obtaining as on today, shall be maintained in respect of the subjeet ;,roperty, and respondent No.4 is also directed not to seal thg suh.ir:ct property. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applicrtions, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed //TRUE COPY// n SD/.B,REKHA RANI SISTANT REGISTRAR \i 1\ \ SECTION OFFICER To, I 3 4 5 o

7. 8. 9. MBC/ BSK

1. The Principal.Secretary, MA and UD Department, State ,rf Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Commissioner Greater_Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad. The Zonal Commissioner, Kh;irtabad Zone, GitMC, ftyclerabid.' The Deputy Conmissioner, Circle No 18, Jubilee niits,'Ct-tVC, Hyderabad. One CC to Sri T Rahul Advocate [OpUC] Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administraiion & Urban Deve lopment, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] One CC to Sri Midde Arun Kumar, SC for GHMC, Advocrrtr: (OPUC) One CC to Ms Saritha Rani, Advocate (OPUC) Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATE]D: 2310912025 ('. € S i'Ar E ,<-,) o() * -t: D :SP/tT .it. ORDER WP.No.28638 of 2025 ALLOWNIG THE WRIT PETITION WITIHOUT COSTS ( $ \w