SRI v. SIDDARTH GOUD, REPRESENTING SRI vs NARSIMHA GOUD, SC FOR HMDA

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 a) issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of [\4andamus declaring the action of the 6th respondent, Commissioner, Peerzadiguda Municipality in entertaining the building permission applications and sanctioning the same by encouraging illegal structures in Sy. Nos. 1to 21 of Parvathapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District and also collecting taxes from the illegal structures as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and the respondents 6 to 9 in entertaining the sale deeds when there is admittedly approved layout in Sy. Nos. I to 21 of Parvathapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgifir District and contrary to the provisions Under Section -172 (16) and 1 78 (3) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 and Section - 1 1 3 (B) of Telangana Panchayat Raj Act 2018, violative of Articles - 14, 19,21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia b) direct the 6th respondent nol to entertain any building permission applications in Sy. Nos. 1to 21 of Parvathapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-t\/alkajgiri District and to pull down the illegal structures in Sy. Nos. 'l to 21 of Parvathapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District c) direct the respondents 7 to 9 not to entertain any registrations in respect of Sy. Nos. 1 to 21 of Parvalhapur Village, Medipally Mandal, IVledchal-fVlalkajg iri District d)and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 6th respondent not to entertain any building permission applications in Sy. Nos. 1 to 21 of Parvalhapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-tvlalkajgiri District and to pull down the illegal structures in Sy. Nos. 1 to 21 of Parvathapur Village, Med ipally [V'landal, Medchal- Malkaj giri District lA NO: 2 OF 2022 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 7 to 9 not to entertain any registrations in respect of Sy. Nos. 1 to 21 of Parvathapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI C. HANUMANTHA RAO Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1, 3,4 7 to 9: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI V. SIDDARTH GOUD, REPRESENTING SRI V. NARSIMHA GOUD, SC FOR HMDA Counsel for the ReSpondent No.6: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MUNICIPALITY Counsel for the Respondent No.8: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER :.1:4'*'7 I HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.40909 OF 2022 ORDER: (ORAL) This writ petition is filed by the petitioners declaring the action of the respondent No.6 in entertaining the building permission applications by encouraging illegal constructions in Survey Nos.1 to 2l of Parvathapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions under Section 172(16) and 178(3) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 and Section 113(8) of Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018, and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India; seeking to direct respondent No.6 not to entertain any building permission and pull down illegal constructions in the subject property; and further seeking to direct respondents No.7 to 9 not to enterlain any registrations in respect of subject propefty.

2. Heard Mr. C. Hanumantha Rao, leamed counsel for the petitioners; Mr. V. Siddarth Goud, leamed counsel, representing Mr. V. Narsimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel for HMDA, appearing for respondent No.3; Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.6 Municipality; and perused the material on record. 2

3. Learned Standing Counsel for HMDA and leamed Standing Counsel for respondent No.6 raised preliminary objection to the maintainability of this writ petition. It is contended that the petitioners hled several writ petitions wherein relief was not granted by this Court. The petitioners cannot seek for general relief without making necessary parties as respondents in this writ petition. It is submitted that W.P.No.36461 of 2021 and W.P.No.366l3 of 2021 filed by the petitioners were dismissed by this Court by orders dated 29.12.2021 and,

30.12.2021 respectively, by giving them liberry to file fresh writ petition by making persons, who are flling applications to seek building permission in respect of subject property, as parties to the writ petition. That despite such orders, the petitioners are again seeking for general directions in respect of huge extent of land more than Acs.300-00 guntas Survey Nos.l to 21 of Parvathapur Village, Medipally Mandal, Medchal-Malkaj giri District.

4. In view of orders dated 29.12.2021 and 30.12.2021 passed in W.P.No.3646l of 2O2l and W.P.No.366l3 of 2021, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. It would suffice to state that the petitioners are at libefty to file objections/representations before the . ,) concemed authority not to issue building permissions and not to entertain any registrations in respect of the subject property or hle writ petition. making such parties, who have applied for building permission, as respondents in the writ petition. Such objections/representations ofthe petitioners shall be considered by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and to all other concemed/interested persons and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 5 With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.AHMED ABDULLAH KHAN ASSISTANT REG/STRAR secrp( 6rr,".* t \ To, Telangana, HYderabad. Bund, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

1. The principal Secretary to Revenue, B.R.K. Bhawan, Tank Bund, The State of z. fhJpiincipal Secretary to t\il.A and U.D Department, B.R K Bhawan, Tank S. ihe Metropolitan Commissioner, The Hyderabad.Metro Development - Authority, bwarna Jayanthi Complex, Ame-erpet, Hyderabad - 500038' 4. The Disirict Cotlector, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Keesara' s. ftre nevenue Divisional officer, Kees-ara Division, Medchal-Malkajgiri District o. f6" Con.,hGioner, Peerzadiguda Municipality, Medipally Mandal, Medchal- Z. ine i''aiisitOar, Cum Sub-Registrar, Medipalty Mandal, lVledchal-Malkajgiri Malkajgiri District-500039. District. B. The District Registrar, Medchal-lvlalkajgiri District. 9. The Sub-Reqislrar. . Narepallv, Medchal-Malkajgiri District' i0.The Station Fouse Officer, , Medipally Police Station, Medchal-Malkaigiri District 1 1 . One CC to Sri C. Hanumantha Rao, Advocate [OPUC] l2.Tv.to CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

13. Ohe CC to Sri V.'Narsimha Goud, SC for HMDA[OPUC] 14. One CC to Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, SC for MunicipalityloPuc] 15.Two CC to The GP for Municipal Administration Urban Development ' Hrgh 16. 1wo CC to The GP for Home, High Cburt for th-e State of Telangana, at Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUT] Hyderabad[OUT] 1Z.Two CD Copies +- .- <!-'.-*tr{'i=-a!.t*--:1 l-:!af@ -..- c' T.l HIGH COURT DATED:0810712025 I ORDER WP.No.40909 of 2022 (;'" ,:i t) 't .) 0 2 sEP 2025 !'i ; ', -,; ,: _'/ ;,t' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0l 2{