Disposed

Mohammed Ashfaq Ahmed v. The State of Telengana

Telangana HC18 Oct 2022WP/28795/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by an individual regarding illegal construction on a property. Counsel for the official respondents submitted that they had served notice to the unauthorized builder and were considering his explanation. The Court recorded these submissions and disposed of the petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Direct the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.09.2021 and pass appropriate orders within four weeks after putting the unofficial respondent on

Mohammed Ashfaq Ahmed Vs The State of Telengana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original J urisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY- THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 28795 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

fi/lohammed Ashfaq Ahmed, s/o. N,4ohammed Haneef Ahmed aged about 41 years, Occ. Business, Rlo. 17-1-1821Sl10, Salauddin Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telengana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and urban development, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 Greater Hyderabad [/unicipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner, Office at Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

¶14

3 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by the Zonal Commissioner, Circle 7, Phool Bagh, Hyderabad.

¶15

4 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by the Assistant City Planner, Circle 7, Phool Bagh, Hyderabad.

¶16

5 I\Ir. [trlohammed Haneef, S/o. Shaikh Bikkan, aged about 65 years, Occ. Business, Rlo. 17 -1-1B2lSl9, Salauddin Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of lt/andamus declaring the inaction on the part of Respondents Nos. 2 to⁴ in taking action on the petitioners representations dated 1710912021 , 1810912021 and 2711012021 (Annexure-1 to 3) in respect of property bearing Rlo. 17-1'182lS/9, Salauddin Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad to stop illegal unauthorized construction of Ground plus upper floors without leaving set-backs, encroaching of road margin in respect of property bearing H.No. 17-1-182lS/9, Salauddin Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad as illegal, arbrtrary, ultravires against the intents and obiects

¶19

of Sectron 451 .1!2. 636 of GHMC Act. 1955 and Or>nsequently direct Respondents N,: 2 to 4 to remove the illegal constructions^vrhrc h are made by Respondent No 5 hr rein forthwith and report compliance to ti e Honble court.

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶21

Petition und,r Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir:Lrms'ances stated in the affidavit filed in r upport of the petition, the High Court ma,r be^pleased to direct the Respondents I os. 2 lo 4 to consider petitioners^re prresentations dated 1710912021 . 1810912)21 and 27-10-2021 (Annexure-1 to 3) ir respect of property bearing R/o 17-1^",t 21519, Salauddin Nagar, Saidabad, Hyd:rirbad to stop illegal unauthorized constr ction of Ground plus upper floors witho -t leaving set-backs, encroaching of roar margin in respect of property bearing ll No. 17-1-'182lS/9, Salauddin Nagar. S; dabad Hyderabad.

¶22

Counsel for the Pet .ioner: SRI SYED MOUNIS JAFER ABID

¶23

Counsel for the Res )ondent No. 1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN tJ,lBAf\ DEV

¶24

Counsel forthe Res )ondent Nos. 2 to 4: SRI PASHAM KRIStiNA REDDY, SC FOR GHMC

¶25

Counsel for the Res )ondent No. 5: NONE APPEARED

¶26

The Court made th: following: ORDER

¶27

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION No. 28795 OF 2O2L

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This Writ Pctition is liled sceking the following relief: to issue appropriate \trit, order or direction more particularl5' one in the nature o[ mandamus declaring the inaction on the part o[ one in the Respondents No. 2 to 4 in taking action on the petitioner's representations dated 1,7.09.2021, la.O9.2o2l and 27.1O.2O21 (Annexure-l to 3) in respect of property bearing R/o 17-l-182/S/9, Salauddin Nagar, Saidabad, I'Iyderabad to stop illegal unauthorised construction of ground plus upper floors without leaving setbacks, encroaching of road margin in respect of property bearing H.No. 17-1l82lSl9, Salauddin Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary, ultra uires against the intents and objects of Sections 451, 452,636 of GHMC Act, 1955 and consequently, direct Respondents No. 2 to 4 to remove the illegal constructions which are made by Respondent No.s herein forthwith and report compliance to the Hon'ble Court and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit arld proper in the circumstances of the case."

¶30

Sri Mounis Abidi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner gave representations on 17 .O9.2021, 18.09 .2021 and 27 .lO.2O2l stating that the unofficial respondent is making illegal construction and no action has been taken by the official respondents till now.

¶31

learned counsel for the unofhcial respondent submits that the petitioner has no locus standi and a show

¶32

------...._---

¶33

callse n ) ir',' s issued to th,' ur){)i-l-ii'iai rlsp.r r icnl irrrrl he h:rs alre ady s l)rnrtted explzrnal ion. 4. Sri V. Praveen litrrnar, learnecl Sl:rr rling^(lounsel lor the Corpr r;-itirrn submits thrrt irftcr rcccir.ing tl' rr rc1,rcsentation of the pr,t Li,:rncr dated 17.O9.)O21, the rc:,pon1rn1.^()'licials ha\re already is sr-retl noticc to the unoffir:ial respor.rrl r - and they u,ill consicler h,:' r:xplanation ol tlrc rurolficial resl), )^-..lcr ll and pass appropria c orders. 5. Recording the submission of th,: Irerrnt cl Standing Counsel. tlre WriL Petition is disposed o' dir ccting the respondr-'r t Corporation to considcr the rel)re^j( !rtatlon of the petitioner dated 17.O9.2O2 I and pass ilppr,r rr ratc orclers in accordanr c with law, within a pe riod of four ivc'e l:i; from tl-re date of receipt of a copy of this order, duly puttir L_: the unofficial responder t on notice. As this Court is dirt'< lirrg the official responder ts to issue notice to the unofficizLl^,:r;pondent, this Court is nol proposing to issue noticc^,.r thc unofficial responder t.^'I'here shall be no order as to costs. 6. The miscellaneous Aop.liqatiorr s, il zLny s.hg!^l stand closed.

¶34

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASSI:;TANTfE:fTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶35

To, 1 The Prrncrpat I ecretary, Municrpal Administration and urt, I I development { tate of Telengana, Secretariat, Hyderabac .

¶36

2 The Commissi )ner Greater Hyderabad lvlunicipal Corpor ation. Office at Tank Bund, Hyderat 3d

¶37

3 The Zonal Cor missioner, Greater Hyderabad lVlunicipal i:orporation, Ctrcle 7, Phool Bagh, H 'derabad.

¶38

4 The Assistanr^, :ity Planner, Greater Hyderabad tJlun:cipa Corpc:.atrcn, Cii.cle 7 Phool Saglr, ii yderabad.

¶39

One CC to SRt SyED IVOUN|S JAFER ABIDI Advocate tOpUCl

¶40

One CC to SRt PASHAM KRTSHNA REDDY, SC FOR GHMC tOpUCl

¶41

Two CCs to Gp FOR Ir/( reransinj at-iyG;;d:iib$DjvlN^{URBANDEV, Hish} court ror the state or

¶42

Two CD Copies.

¶43

One spare copy.

NPJ

PS EK

HIGH COL'R'

DATED:18:'la^t11292,

ORDE:R

WP.No.2879! ot 2021

.rz''
-i\ i: STr}IF o^i
:
; J}
1'l $t[iril
t
--:-qii,';

¶51

DISPOSING⁽ IF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CC STS. 0 * \q-tsG a l/>,

Mohammed Ashfaq Ahmed v. The State of Telengana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Ashfaq Ahmed v. The State of Telengana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kolanu Rukma Reddy, Rukka Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

Kolanu Rukma Reddy, Rukka Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Vijayagiri Shivaji Vs The State of Telangana and another

Mrs. Naheed Nazeer Vs Telangana State

Smt. Kumkuma Rani Vs State of Telangana

Mohammed Ashfaq Ahmed Vs The State of Telengana and 4 Others