B. Krishna Murthy, Vs The State of Telangana.rep… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

B. Krishna Murthy, Vs The State of Telangana.rep… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the inaction of Respondent No.2 (Commissioner, GHMC) in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 20.05.2015 regarding construction by Respondent No.4 without building permission on Plot No.12, Sy.Nos.666, 667 and 670, Vijayapuri Colony, Uppal Circle-II, Hyderabad, is illegal, arbitrary and against the GHMC Act, 1955, and whether Respondent Nos.2 and 3 should be directed to take action under Section 452 of the GHMC Act, 1955. (Raised by way of prayer; not adjudicated on merits - petition dismissed for non-prosecution.)

Ratio / Principle

In view of the memo filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner representing that there are no instructions from the petitioner (vide U.S.R. Nos.93799 of 2025), the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution; the merits of the complaint of unauthorised construction were not adjudicated.

Key takeaways

No order as to costs was passed upon the dismissal.ratio¶34
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending (including the interim-stay application under Section 151 CPC, WPMP No.21141 of 2015), shall stand dismissed.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No.16259 of 2015 (High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, Special Original Jurisdiction; Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, J.; decided 03-09-2025). B. Krishna Murthy had prayed for a writ of mandamus declaring illegal and arbitrary the inaction of Respondent No.2 (Commissioner, GHMC) in not considering his representation dated 20.05.2015 concerning high-handed construction allegedly made by Respondent No.4 (Mote Narsaiah) without any building permission on Plot No.12, Sy.Nos.666, 667 and 670, Vijayapuri Colony, Uppal Circle-II, Hyderabad, contrary to the GHMC Act, 1955, together with a direction to Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to take necessary action under Section 452 of the GHMC Act, 1955. An interim petition under Section 151 CPC (WPMP No.21141 of 2015) sought suspension of the construction. At hearing, counsel for the petitioner (R. Dheeraj Singh) represented that there were no instructions from the petitioner and filed a memo vide U.S.R. Nos.93799 of 2025. The High Court accordingly dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution, with no order as to costs, and miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, were directed to stand dismissed. The merits of the alleged unauthorised construction were not adjudicated.

(

[³³⁸³ ]

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

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

WRIT PETITION NO: 16259 OF 2015

Between:

B. Krishna Murthy, S/o. Ailaiah, aged 53 years, Occ: Agriculture, Rio. Motukonduru, Yadagirigutta Mandal, Nalgonda District, Telangana Statb.

...PETITIONER

AND

The State of Telangana.rep by its Principal Secretary to, Government, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Secretariat Building, Hyderabad - 500022.

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, C.C. Complex, Tank Bund Road, Lor,ver Tank Bund, Hyderabad, Telangana State - 500029.

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Deputy Commissioner, Uppal Kalan, Uppal Kalan Municipality, Uppal Cross Road, Hyderabad, Telangana State - 500039.

Mote Narsaiah, Son of Ailaiah, aged 54 years, Occ: Business, H.No. 2-132, hanuma Sai Nagar, Uppal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State - 500039.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of Respondent No. 2 in not considering the representation d1.20.05.2015 against tte high handed illegal construction made by Respondent No.4 even without any building permission from the authorities on plot No. 12, Sy. No.666,667, and 670, Vijayapuri Colony, Uppal Circle ll, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary and against the Provisions of GHMC Act

1955 consequently for direction to the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to take necessary action under Section 452 of GHMC Act, 1955 in the interest^{of justice.}

LA. NO: 1 OF 201S(WPMP NO :21141 OF 20151

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 lo issue a direction to the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 stop the illegal, high handed construction without permission made by Respondent No.4 on^plot No. 12, Sy. No. 666, 667, and 670, Vijayapuri Colony, Uppal Circle, Hyderabad pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of^justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R. DHEERAJ SINGH

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 2 & 3: SRI PASHAM KRISHNA REDDY, S.C. FOR GHMC

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: -

The Court made the following: ORDER

i-L

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

WRIT PETITION No.16259 of 2O15

ORDER:

This writ petition is fi1ed seeking following relief:

"Declaring t).e inaction of respondent No.2 in not considering the representation dated 20.05.2015 against the high handed illegal construction made by respondent No.4 even without any building permission from the authorities on plot No.12, Suwey Nos.666, 667 atd 670, Vijayapuri Colony, Uppal Circle-tl, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of GHMC Act, 1955 and prays to direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to take necessary action und€r Section 452 of. CHMC Act, 1955." 2 Sri R. Dheeraj Singh, learned counsel for the p€titioner and Sri Pasham Mohith, iearned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 are present.

Learned counsel for the petitioner represented that there are no instructions from the petitioner and to that effect, a memo has been filed uide U.S.R. Nos.93799 of 2025.

. In view of the memo hled by the leamed counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand

dismissed.

SD/. A.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGIS It

/ffRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER

To

One CC to SRI^{R. DHEERAJSINGH, Advocate [OPUC}

Two CCs to^{GP for Municipal Administrationa-nd.} _urban^{Developrnent,High} Court for the State^{of Telangana at Hyderabad.} [OUTI

'1

One CC^{to SRI PASHAM KRISHNA REDDY, S.C. for GHMC IOPUC]}

Two CD CoPies

HIGH COURT
DATED:0310912025
laE S7,o
t-'
.) ? 4 JAil 202[ -.'::,
L-,
1:.
'rt *
ORDER
WP.No.16259 of 2015

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS

2 +