High Court · 2025

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 a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the actlon of the Respondent No.2 in issuing the impugned hearing notice vide Lr.No.G1t2871t2025, dated 31.10.2025, directing the Petitioner to remove the iron container placed in the Petitioner's residential property bearing Municipal House No.2-79l6 t1tA, situated in Sy.No.451/6e, Thippannapet Shivar, Vijayapuri, Jagtial Town, Jagtial District, without considering the lawful title, possession and building permission of the Petitioner and without following due process of law, as il&agal, arbitrary, wittrout jurisdiction, violative of principtes of natural fustice and Articles 14, 21 arrJ 300-A of the Constitution of lndia, and set aside the said impugned notice and consequently direct the Respondents not to take any coercive steps, inc{uding removal or demolition of the iron container / structure, situated in the Petitioner's property bearing Municipal , H.No.2-lgt6l1.t{, in Vijayapuri, Jagtial. Town ;'Jagtial District, : peaceful ,Sy.No.4S Tt6., Thippannapet,Shivar, and not to interfere with the Petitiidner's '.:., ' l: ' t ' ..' :,j..'-r:'1 Petition under 151 CPC praying that in the circumstanced,'stateA in the affidavit'filed:in:.support of the petition, the High Court may Oerpleased to direct the RespgldehtJ; not b take any coercive steps,' including rem'oval ,or. -demolition of tne.,iig,n,c,o-niainer / structure, situated in the petitioherls;property bearing Munfqiaal,;FI.No;2:t!l6l1lA; in sy.No,4sll&, Thippannapet'r'shivar, W"y"puri; Jagtidl'&;:Jagtiat oistiict, and not to interr"r",*itn th"tp"titioirer,s peaceful possession, till the disposat of the present Writ Petition. , ,' ," ,,:.:..;;..:.''.'..':...,.....]'.'.'.-].',.,-..... :..' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BANDI SAI VAMSH1 counset for the Respondent No.i: Gp FoR McpL ADi,lN URBAN DEv counsel for the Respondent No.2: sRl purrA KRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR MCPL The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOTJRABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VTJAYSEN REDDY ORDER: (ORAL) Heard Mr. Bandi Sai Varnshi, learned counsel for the !r petitioner, ild Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, leamed standing counsel for Municipalities, Apearing for respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner claims to be owner of the properly admeasuring 93 square yards in Survey No.451/6a situated at Thippannapet Shivar, Vijaypuri, Jagtial Town and District. The petitioner applied ,for building permission through self- certification system vide application No.5l6l7 lIAGU0275l202l dated 28.06.202l for construction of building consistirg of Ground * one (1) upper floor. Pursuant to self-certification the site of the petitioner was inspected, documents were verified and subsequently letter of approvat for commencement of work was issued to the petitioner yde Lr.No.5t6l7ll{Gll0275l202l dated

14.07.2021 for constrtrction of Ground + one (1) upper floor' The petitioner has also commenced tevetling and foundation works. However, at this juncture, respondent No.3 alorrg with 2 hdnchm6n interfendi ndi[ tne pefrtiond.lJ p.op".E, ana obstructed the construction undertaken by him. As suc{r, the petitioner filed suit in O.S. No.l9 of 2021 before the leamed.principal Junior Civil Judge, Jagtial, (for short .trial Court,) seeking perpetual. injunction restraining respondent No.3 and others ft.m interfering with his property. The said suit is pending before the oial Court.

3. It is submitted that wtrile things stood thus, hearing notice vr'ale Lr.No.Gll28Tl/2025 datrd 21.10.2025 was issued to the petitioner contrary to Section g2(4) of the Telangana Municipalities Act 2019 read with Section 7(2) ofthe Telangana State Building permission Approval and Self Certification System Act 2020- It is turther submitted that about fifteen (15) square yards was acquired by the Govemment for road widening and the petitioner was left with about 24.5 square yards and building permission is not required for the property admeasuring less than 75 square yards. Therefore, the impugned notice is arbitrary and without any authority of law.

4. Leamed standing oounsel for respondent No.2 produced written instructions and submitted that as per the directions of this 3 ,,.;,.....!.."i-.,-*: + -. :.. ..i: : :. Courtbytheonderdated25.og,2o25inw.P.No.29204of2025,- action was initiated against the petitioner, 'ffid impugned'notice ' dated zl.lo.zozs has been issued by respondent No-2 to ttrc petitionerandrespondentNo.4directfurgthemtoattendhearingon |3.L:.2o25andbothtlrepartiesweredirectedtosubmittitte documents, Encumbran@ Certificate' building permission etc'

5.ttisfurttrersubrnittedthatduringthesiteinspectionitwas observed that the petitioner has installed an unauthorized iron container in deviation of the letter of approval for commencement of work dated t4-07 -2021- Though, the petitionr building: permission for construction of Ground + one (1) upper floor, he did not commence constnrction and erected iron container and usrng it for nrnning chicken cenffe' The petitioner has been usirrgtheironcontainerforcommercialpurposewhichiscontrary to the buitding Permission'

6.Asfinaldecisionisnotyettakenpursuanttothehearing noticedat*3|.|o.2o25,whichisimpugnedinthiswritpetition, andthepetitionerwasdirectedtosubmitexplanationtotheSame, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition' 1 ) g d t J 4 I "1, ""i, p"ri*i"" ir fi;r;; 7 ' Accordingrv- *re ot*"rt"* *" petitioner to submit explanation to the hearing notice vtde Lr-No-G1/2L7tt2o2s dated 3t.ro.zozs by fumishing all rhe documents in support of his claim; within a period of seven (7) days from the date of receip of a copy of this order. on receip of the same, respondent No2 is directed to consider the same and pass orders, in accordance with law, by af,fording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondent No.3, within a,period of four (4) weel<s thereof 8' As this order is passed without entering into the merits ofthe case, notice to respondent No.3 is dispensed with. There shalr be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. To,

1. The ASSISTANT neetsrnan //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER Urban Development

5. The commissioner, .ragtiar Municiparity, Jagtiar, Jagtiar District. to SRt BANDT SAtVAMSH|, Advocate [opUC] :"" :: One CC to SRt puT-rA KRTSHNA REDDy;. SC FOR MCPL IOPUC] Two CCs to Gp FOR MC_qL ADMN URBAN DEV; Hign Court for the State of Telangana at HyderaL"o-Jbi.lt1"""'' N 6. Two CD Copies .. .HIGI1 COURT i 10t11t2025 T] Lr l E I Lr WP.No.339'l 4 of 2025 '-: .i ., ,,} S O() 2 5 Hl\R ?.ill[ * * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETIT]ON , WTI.IOUT COSTS $,$*