lrfan Bin Ali v. The State of Telangana

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 vacate the interim order Dt.27.11.2024 in WP NO. 3322512024 and consequently dismiss the Writ Petition with exemplary costs and orders may be passed accordingly in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI VEMUGANTI MAHESH KUMAR Counsel forthe Respondents No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondents No.2 : SRI KADARU PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents No.3 : SRI Y.YADU KRISHNA SAINATH Counsel for the Respondents No.4: Counsel for the Respondent No.Sto7:SRl VADLAKONDA RAVI KUMAR REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER -- EE5E-7 ""-f ,{' I i I I I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN \4'RIT PETITION No.33225 OF 2024 ORDER: Heard Sri Mahesh kumar Vemuganti, leamed counsel for the petitioners, 1ea led Golt.Pleader for Municipal Adminis tration and Urban Develol,rnent, appearing for respondent No. 1, Sri Kadaru Prabhakar Rao. learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2, Sri V.YiLdhu Krishna Sainath, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.l and Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar Reddy, leamed counsel appear.ng lor respondent Nos.5 to 7. None appears for respondent No.4.

2. Petitioru:rs are claiming that they are the absolute ,.rwners and possessors ofthc land to an extent of618.25 sq.yards in Sy.No.1076 and 1077 situated zt Kashmirgadda locality beside Governme:nt Degree College for W omen, Karimnagar Town and District, within 2nd respondent Nlunicipal Corporation. They have obtainel building permit order dat:d 26.10.2022 for construction of a house consisting of stilt for parking - 3 upper floors. According to the petitioners, they have not made any construction pursuant to the work commencement letter dated 26.10.2021.. They have only constructed temporary tin l;hed in the 2 subject land. Even then, on the complaint lodged by the respondent Nos.3 to 7, 2nd respondent has issued a show cause notice, dated

30.03.2024 alleging that the petitioners are proceeding with the construction without permission from the 2nd respondent. They served a copy of the show cause notice on the petitioners. i"d respondent passed speaking order dated 29.05.2024 directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorized construction within 15 days. Challenging the said order, the petitioners filed W.P.No.28074 of 2024. Vide order dated

04.10.2024, this Court disposed of the said writ petition granting liberty to the petitioners to submit eiplanation within (7) seven days and 2"d respondent shall consider the said explanation and pass a speaking order afresh before taking any further action in the matter. Thereafter, the petitioners have submitted explanation dated 11.10.2024 stating that the construction is of 30 years old and they have not made any fresh construction pursuant to the building permit order dated 26.10.2022. They have also submitted seven documents along with the said explanation. Without considering the same, 2"d respondent has passed order dated 02.11.2024 directing the petitioners to remove the said construction and also vacate the subject function hall within fifteen (15) days. Challenging the said order, the petitioners filed the present writ , t 3 petition. Vide order dated27.11.2024, this Court, directed tlre parties to maintain .ttatus quo in respect of the subject property in all respects.

3. The inpugned order dated 02.11.2024 passed by 2n'j respondent t \ is an appealable order. It is not the case of the petitioners herein that the said order is irL violation of the principles of natural just:ce and the procedure laicl lown under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 to maintain present writ petition despite availability of altemative remedy.

4. At th is stage, leamed counsel for the petitioners seeks protection to tl.ri petitioners herein.

5. In the light of the said submissions, this writ petition is disposed of dir:cting the petitioners to prefer an appeal ln terms of Section 252(l) of Telangana Municipalities Act,, 2019, before the Regional Directrr - the appellate authority concemed, within ten days ftom the date ol receipt of a copy of this order and on fi|ng of such appeal, the Regr tnal Director shall dispose of the same withirL sixty days (60) days from rhe date of filing of the appeal. Till then, thc, impugned order dated 02.) t .2024 shall not be given effect. However, it is made clear that the p,:1i11e1..t fail to prefer an appeal in terms of Section 252(1) of the Act,2019, liberty is granted to the respondents to take action in accorda nce with law. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions' if any' pending in this writ 4 petition, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// l \ To, SD/- T. NRUMALA DEVI D PUTY REGISTRAR EETIO N OFFICER riate, BRKR Bhavan erabad- Karimnagar -505001 Sec on, Bu nd, HYd '1 .T H al S Stat ecretary, e of Tel he PrinctP yderabad, MuniciPal Admistrati r Tank angana, Lowe mnagar MuniciPal CorPoration' Kari 2. The Commissioner' UGANTI MAHESH KUMAR' Advo 3. One CC to SRI VEM 4. Twq CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV, High 5. One CC to SRI KADARU PRA 6. One CC to SRI Y 7. One CC to SRI V 8. Two CD CoPies' Telangan a toUTl BHAKAR RAO' Advocate tOPUCl YADU KRIS HNA SAINATH' Advocate toPucl ADLAKOND A RAVI KUMAR REDDY' Advocate toPUCl cate. [OPUC] Court for the State of BSK GJP q$- HIGH COURI- DATED:25102',12025 I ORDER WP.No.3322l'of 2024 \ r.,r - \'r :li 6) i, ) ti5 '\.'t 0 7 APn ims 9t ..;PATC U t .o DISPOSING ()F THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CoSTS (tr. il^l v\ i I I : I