1. Sri C. Madhusudhan Yadav v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 action of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 herein in not considering the representations of the petitioners dated 04.01 .2025 and 28.02.2025 and failure to remove the illegal structure i.e., gate erected by the respondent no. 4 on the public street leading to land admeasuring 326 sq.yds situated on Plot Nos.2,3 and 4 (Part) in Sy.Nos.7,8,9 and 10 (Part) situated at Madhapur, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of provisions of the GHMC Act and consequently direct the respondent nos. 2 & 3 herein to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 04.01 .2025 and 28.02.2O25 and remove the illegal structure i.e., gate erected by the respondent no.4 on the public street leading to land admeasuring 326 sq.yds situated on Plot Nos.2,3 and 4 (Part) in Sy.Nos.7, 8,9 and 10 (part) situated at Madhapur, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. tA 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 direct respondent nos. 2 and 3 herein to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 04.01 .2025 and 28.02.2025 and remove the illegal structure i.e., gate erected by the respondent no.4 on the public street leading to land admeasuring 326 sq.yds situated on Plot Nos.2, 3 and 4 (Part) in Sy.Nos.7, 8,9 and 10 (Part) situated at Madhapur, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI S.SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1&2 : cP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for Respondent No.3 : SRI G.MADHUSUDHAN REDDY, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for Respondent No.4 : The Gourt made the following: ORDER , ) HIGH COTJRT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAI) THE HONOT]RABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY DATE OF ORDER: 09-12-2025 Between Mr. C. Madhusudhan Yadav S/o. C. Gopal Yadav and one (l) another. ... Petitioners AND The State of Telangana Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and three (3) others. ,. Respondents ORDER: (ORAL) This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not considering their representation dated 28.02.2025 and 04.01 .2025 for removing the illegal structures i.e., gate erected by responclent No.4 on the public street leading to Plot Nos.2, 3 and 4 (Part) admeasuring326 square yards in Sun ey Nos.7, 8, 9 and 10 (Part), situated at Madhapur, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as 2 being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955 (for short 'GHMC Act').

2. Heard Mr. S. Sridhar, leamed counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned standing counsel for the GHMC, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors ofthe Plot Nos.2, 3 and 4 (Part) admeasuring 326 square yards in Survey Nos.7, 8, 9 and l0 (Part), situated at Madhapur, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same from respondent No.4 under registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.2985 of 201 8, 2986 of 20 I 8 and 2987 of 2018 dated,23.02.2018. The access road to subject property is a public street and vested in the respondent No.2 - GHMC, and there are two (2) temples existing on the said street. On 17.06.2020, the vendor of the petitioners - respondent No.4 herein along with her henchmen erected gate on the public street which is the access road to the subject property of the petitioners. Respondent No.4 has not obtained any permission from respondent a J Nos.2 and 3 for erecting the gate. Respondent No.4 has not only erected a gate on the public street but also placed a board mentioning it as "PAID PARKING" and demanded money from the petitioners to remove the gate.

4. It is stated that as respondent No.4 has blocked access to the subject property, the petitioners submitted representation dated

25.06.2020 to respondent No.2 in connection with erection of gate by respondent No.4 and requested to remove the same. The petitioners have also filed W.P. No.16175 of 2020 with regard to same issue. During the pendency of the said writ petition, gate erected by respondent No.4 was removed by the GHMC, recording the same, writ petition was dismissed as infructuous by the order dated 23.12.2021.

5. Grievance of the petitioners is that respondent No.4 and her henchmen have again erected gate on the public road, thus causing nuisance and hindrance to the petitioners in entering their property, as such, they submitted another representation dated 28.02.2025 to take action against respondent No.4 to remove the illegal gate erected by her. As there was inaction on the part of respondent t ; f I I i 4 authorities in considering their application, they were constrained to approach this Court.

6. Leamed standing counsel for the GHMC submitted that representation dated 28.02.2025 of the petitioners will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with law.

7. Recording the aforesaid submissions of the learned standing counsel for the GHMC, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioners dated28.02.2025 for removing the gate erected by respondent No.4 on the public street leading to Plot Nos.2, 3 and 4 (Part) admeasuring 326 square yards in Survey Nos.7, 8, 9 and l0 (part), situated at Madhapur, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, and pass orders, in accordance with law, by issuing notice to the petitioners and respondent No.4, by affording opportunity of hearing to them, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt ofa copy ofthis order. 5

8. As this order is passed without entering into the merits, notice to respondent No.4 is dispensed with. If respondent No.4 is in any way aggrieved by this order, she is at liberty to approach this Court seeking modification of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. SD/-A. SRINIVASA REDDY STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/I \: To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Adminstration and Secretariai, Telangana State, Hyderabad. CTION OFFICER n Development,

2. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation' Tankbund' Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Hyderabad. Commissioner, Serilingampally Municipal Circle, Serilingampally'

4. One CC to Sitl s.sRlDHAR, Advocate. toPucl 5.TwoCCstoGPFoRMCPLADMNURBANDEV,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana. [OUT]

6. One CC to SRI KRISHNA REDDY PUTTA, SC FOR MUNICIPALIry/MC' loPUcI Two CD Copies. (tr 7 BSK LS ,. _ . +y_.,_-_..r HIGH COURT DATED:09/1 Zt202s ORDER WP.No.37711 of ZO2S ( r.) -!:il:-.:: i) -:'.. ' ' ,'ii,,:\

1.u;...1.,. 17 it-L [fr ,l ,t ,I * '":... ,'t ll --i""'' PETITION DISPOSING OF THE WRIT WITHOUT COSTS (P Tflil"r t