Bolla satyanarayana v. 1. The State of Te

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 TMANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing notice, dated 10.11.2025 and show cause notice dated 21.11.2025 without authority, jurisdiction, as against the provisions of Sec.178(8) of The Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019, despite explanations dated 12.11.2025 and 25.11.2025 submitted by the petitioner, attempting to demolish the compound wall of petitioner, situated at Plot No.1 Part in Kattarampur locality, within limits of Karimnagar lt/unicipal Corporation on 25.11.2025, by using men and machinery, is illegal, arbitrary and against to the principles of natural justice and violation of Articles 14, 19,21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently to set aside the notices dated 10.11.2025 and show cause notice dated 21.11.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner lA NO: 1 oF 2025 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 suspend the notices dated 10.11.2025 and show.cause notice dated 21.11.202s issued by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner ,without jurisdiction, authority as against the provisions of Sec.178(8) of The Telangana Municipalities Act, 2O1g for demolition of compound wall of the petitioner situated at plot No.1 part in Kattarampur locality, within limits of Karimnagar Municipat Corporation, pending finalization of the Writ Petition Gounsel for the Petitioner : SRI KADARU PRABHAKAR RAo counsel for the Respondent No. 1: Gp FoR McpL ADMN URBAN DEV counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 &3: sRl K. SIDDARTH REDDY, sc FoR MUNICIPAL The Court made the following: ORDER -t IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY NN oF 2025 WRIT DATE OF ORDER: 02'12'20?5 Between: Bolla SatYanaraYana AND .Petitioner The State of Telangana Represented by its Principal Secretary ilJ;1p;t Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and two other ..Respondents ORDER: (ORAL) Thiswritpetitionisfiledbythepetitionerseekingthefollowing relief: --iOtg, .....to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAI,IUS O".furingih" action ofthe 3'd respondent in issuing notice out"a io.r 1.2025 una r't o* cause notice dated 2l'll'2025 without authority, jurisdiction' u' uguin't the provisions of Sec'178(8) of despite explanations dated The Telangunu Municipalities A:,, 12.1t.2025 *o zi.ii .iozs submitred by the petitioner, affempting to demolish ttre comiound walt of p.tiiio#, situ;ted at Plot No'l Part in Kanarampur ro"}"iil,' ;i#i "l"i*i; of Karimnagar Municipal Corporation on z!'ii"zozs' uy u'inf men and- machinery' is illegal' arbitrary uno uguiiri io rt. principtes"oinatural justice and violation of Articles 14, lg, 2l anO iOO-a of tnt Conititution of India and consequentlyto,.tu,io"thenoticesdatedl0.ll.2025andshowcause notice dated n.i-.iOZS issued by the 3'd respondent to the petitioner' and Pass..." 2 \

2. Heard Mr. Kadaru Prabhakar Rao, leamed counsel for the petitioner; Mr. K.Siddarth Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel for respondents No.2 and 3; and perused the material on record.

3. It is claimed that the petitioner is the owner of the subject property bearing Plot No.l part admeasuring 277.92 square yards in Survey No.944lB, situated at Kattarampur locality, Karimnagar Town and District having purchased the same from its previous owner by name Mr. Gaddam Shankar Narayana under registered sale deed bearing document No.8402 of2013 dated 18.07.2013. That earlier, the vendor of the petitioner purchased the subject property from his predecessors-in- title by name Ms. Sardarni Surender Kaur and two (2) others under registered sale deed bearing document No.1053 of 2013 dated

28.01.2013. Ms. Sardami Surendar Kaur and other vendors under sale deed dated 28.01.2013 executed registered partition deed bearing document No.892 of 2011 dated 31.01.2011. It is stated that the petitioner applied for regularization of the subject property under Layout Regularization Scheme (LRS) and respondent No.2 issued proceedings No.C/KARI/025508/2020 dated 12.09.2025 regularizing the subject property of the petitioner upon payment of requisite charges. I i 7 ) J The petitioner applied for building permission vide application No.0l 744:KARII00379/IABP12O25 for construction of ground + 1 upper floor in the subject property and respondent No.2 granted building permission vide building permit order dated 18.09.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued shortfall letter dated 27 .09.2025 directing him to get the plot demarcated. It is submitted that in compliance of the shortfall objections, the petitioner executed mortgage deed in favour of respondent No.2 bearing registered document No'7595 of 2025 dated

15.09.2025 in respect of the land admeasuring 33-84 square meters' However, arbitrarily, respondent No.2 rejected the building permission vide order dated 17.10.2025 with an observation that the petitioner demarcated the site by obstructing the natural drainage flow and found unsatisfactory.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent No.3 issued notice dated 10.11.2025 directing the petitioner to submit the copies of buitding permissions and registered documents for verification within a period of seven (7) days; the petitioner submitted a detailed reply dated 12.11.2025 along with required documents. Respondent No.3 issued another show cause notice No.GI/08/TPS-IVA/ICK/2025 "ry- i,.:iEd'-.": ,.... "itEtisEilif$i: ,l 4 dated 21.11.2025 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the compound wall raised by the petitioner shall not be demolished; the petitioner submitted detailed reply to the said notice on 25.11.2025. Learned counsel submitted that respondent No.3 is Assistant City Planner and does not have jurisdiction to issue such show cause notice dated

21.11.2025 under Section 178(8) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 (for short 'Act'). It is submiued that explanations dated 12.11.2025 and 25.11.2025 submitted by the petitioner have not been considered so far. As there is violation of principles of natural justice apart from lack of jurisdiction in issuing the show cause notices, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 placed on record a copy of the order passed by respondent No.2 vide Roc. No.Glll7ll2023-24 dated 05.05.2025 and submitted that as per the revised work distribution orders, the powers that can be exercised under Section 178(8) of the Act have been delegated to the Assistant City Planner (respondent No.3 herein). Thus, respondent No.3 has jurisdiction in issuing the show cause notices. _ BF*- &to E&t; 7

6. As it is submitted by the leamed counsel for the petitioner that reply has been submitted by the petitioner to the impugned show cause noticedated2l,|l.2o25andtheshowcausenoticedatedl0.ll.2025, this Court is not inclined to make any observations on the point of jurisdiction. However, respondent No'3 is directed to conduct enquiry pursuant to the impugned show cause notice dated 2l ' I I '2025 and notice dated 10.1 l.2}25,by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner' and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law' Pending such exercise' status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained in respect of the subject property. 7 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. SD/.P. PONNA KRISHNA STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development ' lNii ;ii'Ubi'o-e-pi, sei?ltiiGi,in" stut" or relansana' Hvderabad . z bdrirrniJsLnLr, xaiimnaiii'Mjnicipat Corporation'-Karimnaoar District' 5. i#"H;i.-r;i' cit, Plrffid;, ieii,ti'i''i"gii Aieal Kariirnasar Municipar -3:'J3'38"s[1''ffi 8fl?li,f; rll'lfttofl iA[i!,Advocate-{.P.UC] ;. ffi tt't" sHi k.SioonirH neoov, sc.F-oRI\l.uNlclPAL ;: ifi c"cli"-di, ibi-fici;r-- noilrr.t une-nN DEV, Hish court for the state of 7. Two CD CoPies Telangana. [OUT] PVL BS ,.:'.t'::' I'| HIGH COURT DATED:021'1212025 \ t ORDER WP.No.36429 ot 2025 r iiE Ii -r4 14: t1 (J i9 . i.t. (' 12 DEc M .\ ,/ * .j' ;)' r.:-r..tt -a;-- DISPOSI G OF THE WRIT PETI WITHOUT OSTS c