Disposed

Mohammed Shabbir Hussain alias Jaber Patel v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Apr 2022WP(PIL)/19/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL concerning unauthorized construction, the Court held that the existence of a civil injunction order precludes the municipality from taking further demolition action, disposing the petition with liberty to suit civil proceedings outcomes.

What did the court decide?

The petition is disposed of with liberty to take steps based on the pending civil suit.

Mohammed Shabbir Hussain alias Jaber Patel Vs The… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶6

W.P.^(PlL) NO: 19 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

N/lohammed Shabbir Hussain alias Jaber Patel, S/o Mohammed Sabir Hussain, aged about 51^years, Occ. Social Activist,^FVo Flat^{No. 102, Jyothi} Residency, 11-6-840, Red Hills, Hyderabad^- 500 004.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad

¶12

The Greater Hyderabad IVunicipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad

¶13

The Zonal Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad l,4unicipal Corporation, Central Zone, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

¶14

The Deputy Commissioner, Circle-\2, [r,4ehdipatnam, Khairatabad Zone, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Chief City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,^Tank Bund, Hyderabad

¶16

The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad

¶17

The Director of Fire Services, BRKR Bhavan, 1 st floor, B-Block, Tank Bund, Hyderabad

¶18

B. The Assistant Divisional.Engineer, TSSPDCL, South Circle, Ir/int CoqPound, ,'.

¶19

Khairatabad, Hyderabad

¶20

The Managing Director, HMWSSB, Khairatabad Hyderabad

¶21

10.Syed Ghulam Mohiuddin, S/o Syed Ghulam MuStafa, Aged 64^years,H.No. 12-2-800190, Dilshadnagar Colony, Gudi Malkapur, Reti Bowli, Hyderabad.

¶22

.,.RESPONDENTS

¶23

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}

¶24

¶25

i t I trti ; I

¶26

pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 to 6^{herein to} demolish/ pull down and removed the unauthorized and^{illegal structureon an} extent of 166.26 sq. Meters^(equivalent to about^{200 sq. Yards)at H.No. 12-2-} 800/90, Dilshad Nagar Colony, [/ehdipatnam.

¶27

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High Court may be pleased to} direct the respondents not to issue occupancy^{certificate to the lOthrespondent} by^providing civic amenities like domestic^{water, electricity connection to any of} the units in the^premises bearing House^{No.12-2-800190,Dilshad NagarColony,} lvlehd ipatnam.

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. A.VEERASWAMY

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP^{FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION&} URBAN DEVELOPMENT

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5: SRl.^{N. ASHOK KUMAR, SC FOR} GHMC

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6 &^{7: GP FOR HOME}

¶33

Counsel forthe Respondent No. 8: SRl. R.^{VINOD REDDY,SC FORTSSPDCL}

¶34

Counsel for the Respondent No.^{9: SRl. T. SUDHAKARREDDY, SC FOR} HMWSSB

¶35

Counsel for the Respondent No. 10: NONE^APPEARED

¶36

The Court made the following:

¶37

¶38

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

¶39

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILT

¶40

W.P {PILl.No.L9 of 2022

¶41

ORDER: (Per t.he Hotl'ble the Chief Jtlstrce Sottsh Chandra Sllarma)

¶42

The present public interest litigation has been filed stating that the respondent No.10 has constructed a house contrary to the building permission granted by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC).

¶43

The GHMC has filed a counter affidavit in the matter

¶44

¶45

and the same reveals that the building permission was granted on 29.1 1.2019 for construction ol stilt + two upper floors and at the time of inspection, it was noticed that the respondent No.10 has constructed five floors and a pent house. Accordingly, a notice rvas issued and the pent house was demolished on 30.12.2021. No reply was given by the respondent No.10 to the notices and, on the contrary, he has preferred a civil suit i.e., O.S.No.763 of on 2O2l and an injunction order has been passed 04.01.2022. A copy of the tnjunction order has also been brought on record.

¶46

¶47

Ir,.li I I !

¶48

In the considered opinion of this Court, once there^is al'i injunction order granted in a civil suit, the GHMC cannot take further action in the matter.

¶49

IS Therefore, the present public interest litigation disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner as^u,e11 as^the GHMC to take appropriate steps in respect of the^pending civil suit and to take further consequential action keeping in view the judgment and decree/orders passed in the civil suit.

¶50

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, sha1l

¶51

stand closed. There sha11 be no order as to costs

¶52

SD/.B.SATYAVATHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad

¶57

The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad

¶58

The Zonal Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Central Zone, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

¶59

Co*/""

¶60

I \ i I i

¶61

The Deputy Commissioner, Circle-12, Mehdipatnam, Khairatabad Zone, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad.

¶62

The Chief City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad

¶63

The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad

¶64

The Director of Fire Services, BRKR Bhavan, 1 st floor, B-Block, Tank Bund, Hyderabad

¶65

The Assistant Divisional Engineer, TSSPDCL, South Circle, Mint Compound, Khairata bad

¶66

Th nagrng D trector, HMWSSB, Khairatabad,Hyderabad ne CC to Sri. A,Veeraswamy, Advocate IOPUC]

¶67

One CC to Sri. N. Ashok Kumar, SC for GHMC IOPUCI

¶68

One CC to Sri.R. Vinod Reddy, SC for TSSPDCL [OPUC]

¶69

One CC to Sri.T. Suidhakar Reddy, SC for H[/WSSB [OPUC]

¶70

'14.Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administration & Urban Development, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶71

Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] '16.Two CD Copies.

¶72

17.One Spare Copy

Pt\4

BS k

t .:8

I i I I I I I I I

I I I

l i lrli IIil li

HIGH COURT

I DATED:1 210412022 I

¶81

ORDER

¶82

WP(P!L).No.19 of²⁰²²

¶83

(. gF rA(4
I'
$
(]
o s (]
$
}/9tH *
'llt.
fi'"

¶84

Disposing of^{the WP(PIL)} Without costs.

¶85

%,oa
d <br>/<(-<br>V)

Mohammed Shabbir Hussain alias Jaber Patel v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Shabbir Hussain alias Jaber Patel v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Shankar and 2 others Vs Sri. D. Prabhakar Rao and another

Ainala Nandini Vs Sri. D. Prabhakar Rao and another

Valadasu Praveen Kumar, Vs Sri. D. Prabhakar Rao and another

I.Narasimha Murthy Hyd Vs Secy Min of Law J and Home Affairs New Delhi and 8 Others

Letter submitted by the Member Secretary Vs The State of Telangana

Kondapally Sridhar Reddy Vs Ramesh Reddy Meda