✦ High Court of India · 08 Dec 2025

Mr. Abdul Rahman v. 1. The State of Telangana

Case Details High Court of India · 08 Dec 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
08 Dec 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,016 words

Acts & Sections

6, Mr. N Poornachandar, S/o. Not Known, R/o Hyderabad 7. Mr. Bimal Kedia, S/o. Not Known, R/o Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol lhe Constitution of India 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' by declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly Respondent No.2 to 5 in not taking action against the Unofficial Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 who are carrying out unauthorized deep excavation of 30 feet Depth and Rock Blasting without taking necessary permissions from GHMC and other competent authority such as mines and geology clearance which is adjacent to the petitioners property in Door No.8-2-674l5, Road No.1 3, Banjara Hills, inspite of receiving petitioner's written complaint dated 25.1O.2025 and also FIR No.850 of 2025 Dated.15.10.2025 was registered and consequently may direct the Official Respondent Nos Unofficial Respondent Nos 6 and adjacent to the petitioner,s Land in the interest of Justice lA NO: 1 OF 2025 2 to 5 to take necessary.action against the 7 for carrying of such tnauthorized activity Petition under Section .l 5l CpC praying that in the cir,lumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High cour rray be preased to direct the Official Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to take necessar/ action against the Unofficiar Respondent Nos 6 and 7 for carrying of such uniruthorized activity adjacent to the petitioners Land in the right of the petitioner,s written compraint Dated 15'10 2025 in the interest of justice pending disposzrr of the main writ Petition Counsel for the petitioner: SRl. NAZIR AHMED KHAN counser for the Respondent No-1 : Gp FoR MUNrcrpAL ADwITNT'TRATTON AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2to4: SRI MIDDE ARUN KL|MAR, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.S: AGp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6&7: _ The Court made the following: ORDER I I r I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANCANA AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE B' VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.37601 OF 2025 DATE OF ORDER: 08'12'2025 Between: Abdul Rahman AND The State o[ Telangana Reoresented bv its Principal Secrctary il tiil. s..rctariat' Ayderahad and six otlters ..Petitioner .Respondents ORDER: (ORAL) Heard Mr. Nazir Ahmed Khan, learncd counsel for the pctitioner; Mr. Midde Arun Kumar, leamed Standing Counsel lor GHMC' appearing for respondents No.2 to 4; and perused the material on record' Leamed Standing Counsel for respondcnts No'2 to 4' basing on the 2. written instructions, submitted that on complaint of the petitioner' action was takenbytheGHMC'TheTownPlanningStatlCircle-l8'GHMC'inspected the site of respondents No'6 and 7 who have undertakcn unauthorizcd excavation of cellar in property bearing Door No'8-2-674i5' road No'13' Banjara Hilts, Hyderabad without obtaining prior permission from the GHMC and show cause notice dated 19.08.2025 was issued directing them to submit explanation within a period of fifteen ( 15) days as to why the unauthorized excavatior/construction should not be removcd' Respondents No'6 and 7 are I \ \ I ! \ also directed to lorthwith stop further construction. Learn :c Standing Clounsel submitted that the GHMC will take necessary action if r,,trk is resumed by respondents No.6 and 7 in the subject property.

3. As it is statcd by the learned Standing Counsel lirr GHMC that show cause notice dated 19.08.2025 has already been issuetl and unauthorized cxcavation/construction made by respondcnts No.6 and 7 i; l;topped, recording the same, this writ petition is disposed of. Il further unaulh()rizod excavation/ construction work is undertaken by respondents No.6 arrd 7. respondent No.3 shall scaI thc subject property and ensure that no constntttion is under taken without building permission/sanctioned plan.

4. As the order is passed without entering into the nerits of the case. noticc to rcspondenls No.6 and 7 is dispensed with. Hor-,-r.ver il. respondents No.6 and 7 are, in any way, aggrieved by this order, th(,y are at libcrty to approach this Court seeking for modification of this ordcr. fhcrc shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, il'a t1.. pcnding in this rvrit petition. stand closed. I]D/. MOMINA MEHAR ASI;ISTANT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER \ To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and IJrban Development , fi51il;t.i"n"i. ct"lGirivo"iin,o Municipal cor6o'atton' GHMC Tank Deoartment, Secretariat. at Hyderabad- l5 Bund, Hyderabad-SDl T.SRIDEVI - Hyderabad. No. 1 8, Khairatabad, Hvder;bad_TS 3 The.Deputy commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipar corporation, circre 4. The Assistant Citv Planner, Town planning Section, Greater Hyderabad - Muni-cipatCorporition, cirCte N;. js, KiiJi[ir"o'ro,'ijvaera'oao_t5'---- 5. The station House officer, Banjara Hittr cori".3hti6n, sTnlJra-trirts, 9 9ne CC to SRI NAZ|R AHMED KHAN, Advocate [OpUC] 7 lvo CCs to Gp FOR M_UNlCtpAi nOuflr,riSineriOr.r ArriO URBAN "sc 9 9n" cc to sRt. MtDbE ARUN- xurraAii, 9. Two CCs to Gp FOR HOME High Court foiti 10.Two CD Copies DEVELOPMENT Hioh court for ttre SiJie'or Te"tintrna, at Hyderabad [oUTr ion'BHrrabjoi,udl--*- ,"' ', biat" oflbtanga;a, at " Hyderabad [OUTI BM PSK CC TODAY I I e l: - i:, i- l! ) I I HIGH COURT DATED:08112t2025 t- l:/ o 1, 'i1 .i'- . 'r' "s ^!>\)' (l TL l- \ ia) \, \.o.,r)i..fg;s a e-: '----- -.-,-__.r* ORDER WP.No.37601 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \\

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