✦ High Court of India · 23 Oct 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 23 Oct 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
23 Oct 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,096 words

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY WRlT PETITION NO: 31865 OF 2025 Between: Kotike Santhosh Kumar, S/o Kotike Dhan Raj Aged about 33 years, Occ' Business, Rl/o Flat No.203, Plot No.90, Sri Swapha, Residency, Prashanth Naqar. Nizamoet Road, Near Kolan Ragava Reddy Function Hall, High- Teision Line Road, Hydernagar village, Kukatpally, Hyderabad- 500 085. AND 1 2 The State of Telangana, ReP bY Administration Department, Secretariat Telangana. The Municipal Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad, Telangana. ...PETITIONER its Principal Secretary MuniciPal Buildings, Tank bund, HYderabad, Hyderabad IVunicipal Corporation, 6

3. The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC, Ctrcle-24 ' K.K.P., Hyderabad' Telangana Planning Officer, GHMC, Ctcle-24, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, 4. The Town Telangana. Smt. Kotagiri Sailaja, Wo B. Lakshmana Murthy Aged-about 61- years,.Occ Govt. Emdloyee, Ri/o. H. No. 1O-4-14413, Sainikpuri Colony,^Kothagudem, Badradri-Kott-agudem District, Telangana State, Pin code 507 101 . B.Lakshmana Murthy, S/o Rama Murthy Aged about 65- years, Occ Rtd'. Gov Employee, R/o. H. No. 10-4-14413, Sainikpuri Co-lony,^Kothagudem, tsadradrr- Kotiagirdem District, Telangana State, Pin code 507 101 b ...RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the official respondents in stopping the illegal constructions of the Respondent No 5 and 6 who are constructing commercial complex in the residential area, without following the norms of the GHMC, as illegal, arbitrary, and Violation of Principles of Natural justice and in violation of the constitution of lndia, and ccr sequenfly direct the official respondents to take steps for stopping any further ;onstructions of the respondent No.5 and 6 by cancelling the Building construct r n permission issued to the respondent No 5 and 6. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the ci ., u1-1.1rn.". stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High co r t may be pleased to direct the official respondents to take steps for stopping an1, urther constructions of the respondent No.5 and 6 by cancelling the Building cor struction permission issued to the respondent No.5 and 6, pending disposal of abc ve writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI R.ESHWAR CHANDER Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Gp FOR MUNICIPAL AD vIINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVEL( PMENT Counsel for Respondents No.2 to 4 : SRI K.RAVI MAHENDE R, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for Respondents No.S & 6 : The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOTIRABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3 1865 0F 2025 ORDER:(ORAL) Heard Mr. R. Eshwar Chander, leamed coutlsel fbr the petitioner, and Mr. K. Ravi Mahender, leamed standing counsel for the GHMC, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4'

2. Learned standing counsel for the GHMC placcd on record written instructions, show-cause notice dated l3'05'2025, speaking orderdated05.06.2025andnoticedatedlS.l0.2025issuedunder Section46l-AoftheGreaterHyderabadMunicipalCorporationAct 1955(forshort.GHMCAct').Itissubmittedthatshow.causenotice videNoticeNo'UC.104421W-|23\C\R-24/TPS/GFIMCl2o25dated

13.05.2025 has been issued by respondent No'3 to respondent Nos'5 and 6 stating that unauthorized construction has been made in the second (2nd floor) over the existing Cellar + Ground + one ([) upper floor in the premises bearing H.No.1-2-33lP-83/l situated at Prashanth Nagar, Hyder Nagar, Kukatpally, and they were directed to appear for personal hearing on 30.05.2025 at 03:00 P'M' However' respondent Nos.5 and 6 neither submitted reply to the show-cause 2 W.P. No.31865 of 202-s notice nor appeared lor personal hearing. As suc.r ,OH[i"?'::j:: 'ide Notice No.UC_t 0442/W_123/CIR-24lTpS/(i, \4C12025 dated 05.06.2025 \\,as passed by respondent No.3 ting respondent Nos.5 and 6 to remove unauthorized constructic r in the subject property within a period of fifteen (15) days. Subsequently, respondent No.j addressed letter to respondent No. 1 yials I_r.No.UC_ .dirtx I O442lW - I 23 t (- -24 /Tt S rKpZ/ C.IVC/2025 dated I i I 0.2025 srating that concemecl NAC engineer has inspected the suL j )ct properry and found some deviations, hence the Nodal Officer, < ukatpally Zone, was requested to take necessary action for c:molishing the unauthorized construction made in the subject proper y. Later, notice dated 18.10.2025 under Section 461_A of the GH\4- Act was issued intimating respondent Nos.5 and 6 that unauthorized , 6n51rustion will be sealed by respondent - GHMC authorities.

3. Learned standing counser for the GHMC furttt r submitted that unauthorized construction made by respondent Nos 5 and 6 in the subject propertl' will be sealed and thereafter appro:.iate action will be taken for demolition of the same. 3 W.I'. No.3 1865 of 2025 Datcd 23 10.2025 Recording the aforesaid submissions of the learned standing 4 counsel lor the GHMC, rhe writ petition is disposed of, directing respondent - GHMC authonties to implement the speaking order vide passcd by respondent No.3 Notice No.UC-10442lW-l2l/ClR-24/ fps lGHMCt2025 dated 05.06.2025 and notice issued under Secrion 461-A of the GHMC Act and seal the unauthorized construction made by responclent Nos.5 and 6 in the propefty bearing I{.No.l-2-j3lp- 83/i situated at Prashanth Nagar, Hyder Nagar, Kukatpally, within a period of fbur (4) weeks from the date of receipt ol a cop1, of this

5. As this order is passed without entering into the merits, notice to respondent Nos.5 and 6 is dispensed with. However, if respondent Nos.5 and 6 are aggrieved by this order, they are at liberty to approach this Court seeking modification of this order. 'lhere shall be no order as to costs As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To, Sd/. L. VIJAYA ASSISTANT BEGI (7 SECTION O LAXMI STRAR FFICER Secretariat'

1. The PrinciPal Se 2 The Telangana State' f:ii?,s:t"r'33l,fi[T:::39:laDepartment' Municipal Commissioner' Greater Hyderabad MuniciPal CorPoration, Hyderabad, Telangana' The Deputy Commissioner' GHMC' Ctcle-24' K'K P'' Hyderabad' Telangana 3 c,-tl [, *ld

4. The Town Telangana. Planning Officer, GHMC, Ctcle_24, Ku atpally, Hyderabad.

5. One CC ro SRI R.ESHWAR CHANDER, Advocate. top, ll 6. Two CCs to Gp for.Municrpal Adminjstration and.Urb;r Development, High court for the state of rerinfana Ji'Hvitfi#o.iourf 7. One CC to SRt K RAVTNDER TMAHENDER, SC for GHt\t ) [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies. I N. d1.j'' BSi(IMP HIGH COURT DATED:2311012025 ORDER WP.No.31865 of 2025 /. r:.\ i ) ) !t . i*ffi;4* 16'lllJllj c)(, c'\ \' :, -sn t / I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o-lir:s ,/lqltc ; I i I

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments