1. Neelam Shankaraiah v. Rural Development Dept, Secretariat, Hyderabad

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 impugned notice dated 20.12.2025 issued by the 4th respondent to the petitioners for removal of the construction of the petitioners in respect of the land in Sy.No.4A admeasuring Ac.0.16 gts situated at chinnagudur Village and Mandal, Mahabubabad District, as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and unjust and against the purport of U/s.114(3) of relangana panchayat Raj Act, 2018 and consequenfly to set aside the impugned notice dated

20.12.2025 o;'the 4th respondent. lA NO: I 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 irnpugned notice dated 20.12.202s of the 4th respondent, pending finalization of tre Writ Petition. Counsel for th,e Petitioner: SRI JALLT KANAKAIAH REPRESENTING FOR SRI NARENDAR JALLI Counsel for thrlRespondents No.1 & 2: Gp FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL OEVELOPMENT Counsel for the, Respondent Nos.3 & 4: SRt K. PRADEEP REDDY, S.C. FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT Counsel for the Respondent No.S: SRt c. RAVI CHANDRA SHEKAR The Court made the following: ORDER TN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO.39605 OF 2025 DATED | 24.12.2025 Between Neelam Shankaraiah and another. AND Petitioners The State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad and 4 others Respondents ORDER This Writ Petition is filed challenging the notice dated 20.12.2025 issued by respondent No.4 to the petitioner for removal of the construction in respect of the petitioners' land admeasuring Ac.0.l6 gts ln Sy.No.4A, situated at Chinnagudur Village and Mandal, Mahabubabad District.

2. Heard Sri Jalli Kanakaiah, leamed counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Govemment pleader for panchayat Rajz and Rural Development, appearing for respondents No.l & 2, -/ '''" 7 w.P. No.39605 of 2025 Sri K. Pradeep Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat appearinl; for respondents No.3 & 4 and Sri G. Ravi Chandra Shekar, learned c,lunsel for respondent No.5.

3. It is stated that pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P.No.33529 of 2025 dated 10.1 1.2025, respondent No.4 has issued the impugned notice; however, and there is no time mentioned in the said notic,: for submission of explanation.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have submitted online application for construction permission and since the permission was neither denied nor rejected, they have proceeded with the construction under deemed permission. It is furthel submitted that the petitioners have made several represental ions, including issuance of legal notice dated 14.08-2023, on the earlier occasions to respondent No.4, but the same were not responded to, except for unofficial respondent No'5 filing W.P.No.33529 of 2025.

5. Leanred counsel appearing for respondent No.5 submitted that the petitioners had no permission to make construction and therefore' \ ! 3 W.P. No.39605 of 2025 respondent No.5 approached this Court and this Court had directed the respondents to take action in accordance with law

6. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the impugned notice dated 20.12.2025 is only a notice calling for an explanation and does not refer to any final action to be taken by the authorities. Since no time has been specified in the said notice for submission of an explanation, the petitioners are permitted to submit their representation/explanation to the official respondents within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such a representation, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken against the property of the writ petitioners

7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

8. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. SD/.P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// 1 The Principal Secretary, Panchayat f,aj and Rural Development Dept', State of ietangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The District Panchayat Officer, Mahabubabad District. 2 n I 1,. To

3. The tVlandal Parishad Development officer, chinnagudur Mandal' Mahabubabad District.

4. The Panchayat Secretary, Chinnaguduru Gram Panchayat' Chinnagudur Village and Mandal, Mahabubabad ulstrlcl

5. One CC to SRI NARENDAR JALLI, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj andRural Development' High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad lou ll I .One

7. One CC to SRI K. PRADEEP REDDY, S'C' for Gram Panchayat [OPUC] CC to SRI G. RAVI CHANDRA SHEKAR' Advocate IOPUC] 8. 9. Two CD CoPies MP BS \ J HIGH COURT T,IfiD,J DATED :24t12t2025 I {Hb.5 IA I 0 6 iili ?[26 ' i.:,- !i . ORDER \ WP.No.39605 of 2O2S r { DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS