Mohammad lrfan v. 1- The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondent No.2 in granting permission to the petitioner for construction of house in vacant portion of petitioner's land admeasuring 189 11 Sq yards in H.No. 7-6011 (Assessment No 1127) in Pothkapalli Village, Odela tvlandal, Pedapalli District, pursuant to the application made by the petitioner dated 10-09-2024 and furthermore the action of 2nd respondent in issuing the impugned notice vide Lr.GPi50/2025 dated 21-10-2025 as illegal, arbitrary, and U nconstitutional and thereby infringing their Fundamental rights and to consequently may be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to consider petitioner's application dated '1 0-09-20',lt and grant him permission for the construction of the house and also to n:<;all the impugned notice vide Lr.GP15012025 daled 21-10-2025. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci'cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court nray be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 not to interfere in the petitioner's and admeasuring 189.11 Sq.yards in H.No 7-60i1 (Assessment No. 1127) in Pothkapalli Village, Odela Mandal, Pedapalli District pending disposal of the abovs writ petition lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci-cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court nray be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to consider petitioner's applicatic,n dated 10-9-2024 for construction of house in petitioner's land admeasuring 189.1 1 Sq yards in H.No. 7-6011 (Assessment No. 1127) in Pothkapalli Village, Odela Mandal, Pedapalli District, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. TRUPTHI AGARWAL Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 3 to 5: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI K.PRADEEP REDDY, SC FOR GRAM PACHAYAT The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADIIAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION No.3327 o oF 202s ORDER: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is challenging the notice issued by the respondents on 21.1O.2025 and also in not granting permission to the petitioner for construction of a house pursuant to his application dated LO.O9.2O2\ as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent Nos.l & 3 to 5 and Mr.K.Pradeep Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, appearing for respondent No.2.

3. The petitioner claims to have made an application for building construction on 1O.O9.2024 along with all the relevant documents. Since there was no response from the authorities, within the prescribed time for reversion if proper documents are not filed, the petitioner has assumed deemed approval. It is submitted that the petitioner also made several representations to the respondent authorities for grant of building permission, but there was no response. However, vide notice dated t \\ 2 \

21.1O.2O25, the respondents have asked the petitioner 10 stop illegal construction. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ Petil ion.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has dralr'n the attention of this Court to the contents of the writ trlfidavit to demonstrate that the petitioner has made an application for construction permission along with a-11 the relevant clc'cuments' Learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Ra; as w'ell as 5. the learned Stand.ing counsel for Gram p216[a1'rr1 ' hou'ever' submitted that the application of the petitioner \t'as; reverted on 24.Og.2C/25 with a comment hpload proper docuro{rnts' lt is submitted that petitioner ought to have uploaclerl the proper documents, but there was no action on the p'art of the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner's application r:c'uld not be processed.

6. Having regard to the above submissions c'f both the parties, this Court deems fit and proper to direct -kre petitioner to make a fresh application for building permissiorL along with alltherelevantdocumentsandifsuchanapplicationismade, the respondents sha-ll consider and process [tre same in ( L 3 accordance with law, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of said application.

7. With the above direction, the Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ petition, shall srand closed. \ To, //rRUE coPY, ASS,sTAN?DJ.!:YRXA ;;;.6;;;

1. The Principal Secreta J[:,,Y,l]i?jIrTi'i3.,"?":*ropment orricer, (MpDo),odera Mandar, pedapari s;;,;t,;;[Hft;;i:fl f"il".Jixj:S:1",3f +yj;!3;Ju,or.,.n,Deparrment, Pa n cha va t, Poth kapa r r v, ode ra Ma nda r, ' J::.5;ifi B,lfl .,,s?Ti,ffl;",o6?I" 3. The Diskict panchayat Officer, peddapalti District, Telangana State. t t 6 One CC to Ms. TRUPTHI AGARWAL, Advocate tOpUCl 7. One CC to SRI K PRADEEP REDDY, SC FOR GRAM PACHAYAT IOPUC] B Two CCs to cp FOR.PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV, High Court for the 9. Two CD Copies #er}#g,PanchaYat officer (MPo), odela Mandar, pedapaili District. State of Tetangana at HydJrab; ioUii^" ''"''^ BS BS d HIGH COURT DATED: 1111112025 ORDER WP.No.33270 oI 2025 e o ,-,:1':- -\ -, l'- S I4 fA.-t)...\ '",: \ ./,\. \( 1 I Nr\I 2Q5 I + -) t I l;r,^l( - r tf-O DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS .,,c