Disposed

Mohammed Adil v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Feb 2025WP/30406/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage after the parties settled the dispute. The Court directed the municipal authority to consider the unauthorized construction regularization application and take action strictly in accordance with the Act within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider regularization application and take action within 4 weeks.

Mohammed Adil Vs State of Telangana — Municipal and Town Planning | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

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

¶3

IVONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 30406 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

lvlohammed Adil, S/o. Late. Mohammed Khaja, Aged about 33 years, Occ Business, R/o.H.No.8-3-16617l13,Zehra Gulshan Bagh, Erragadda, Hyderabad.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, ttlunicipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

Greater Hyderabad lMunicipal Corporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner.

¶13

Deputy Commissioner, Circle No.19, Borabanda, GHMC, Hyderabad.

¶14

Assistant City Planner, GHIvlC, Circle No.19, Borabanda, Hyderabad.

¶15

Aktar Begum, Wo. tvlohd. Basheer Uddin, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H.No.8-3- 1 6617 I 121 A, Zehra Gulshan Bagh, Erragadda, Hyderabad.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

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, a Writ, Order or Orders more particularly one in the nature Writ of l\ilandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly respondent No.2 to 4 herein in not demolishing the illegal and unauthorized construction of Ground plus 2 Upper Floors raised by the unofficial respondent in the premises bearing Municipal No.8-3-166/7/'12lA, admeasuring 15 square yards, situated at Zehra Gulshan Bagh, Erragadda, Hyderabad inspite of bringing notice to the official respondents i.e. respondent corporation by way representation dated

¶18

26t1gl2o24 is as illegal, arbitrary and^{u n} constitutiona^{I besidesgrpss violationof} the provisions of the Hyderabad IVunicipal^{corporation Act 1955 consequently} direct the official respondents i.e.^{respondentNo.2 to 4 hereinto remove /} demolish the illegal and unauthorized^{construction of Ground} t'lus^{2 Upper Floors} raised by the unofficial respondent^{herein in the aforesaid premises in the} interest of^justice.

¶19

l.A.NO:1 OF 2024

¶20

Petition Under Section 15'1 CPC^praying that in the cir:umstances^stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{High Courtmay be pleasedto} direct the respondents to forthwith stop further^construction and^{seal the} premises bearing lVlunicipal No. B-3-166/7/12lA, admeasuringl 15 square^yards, situated al Zehra Gulshan Bagh, Erragadda,^Hyderabad.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI DARWESH CHANDRA^SHEKAR

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN^{AND URBAN} DEVELOPMENT

¶23

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : SRI G.MADHUSUDHAN^REDDY

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI MOHD ABDUL QUADEER

¶25

The Court made the following ORDER

¶26

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶27

1VRIT PETITION No.3O4O6 of 2o24

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, lehrned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No. 1 and Sri G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the record.

¶30

In view of the nature of relief sought by the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage dispensing with notice to respondent No.5.

¶31

Petitioner is resident of Zehra Gulshan Bagh, Erragadda, Hyderabad. Respondent No.5 is also resident of the same area. Respondent No.5 obtained permission for construction of ground + 2 upper floors and she has raised columns for construction of 3.d floor illegally. Therefore, petitioner has submitted a representation, dated 26.09.2024 to respondent No.3 with a request to take action against respondent No.5. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, respondent No.3

, i :j'.i.',l.:t

W.P.No.30406 of 202

did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent No.3, petitioner hled the present writ petition.

¶36

During pendency of the present writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted a re.cresentation, dated 31.01.2025 stating that the petitioner and respondent No.5 are cousins and as per the advise of elders of both the parties, the matter has been settl:d out of the Court. Therefore, he sought to withdraw the present writ petition.

¶37

Whereas, Sri G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 has furnished written instruction of respondent N,t.4, wherein, it is stated that staff of respondent No.4 inspc,:ted the site, found that respondent No.5 constructed building consisting of ground + 3 upper floors without obtaining prior permission from GHMC for premises house bearing No.8-3166 lA/12/A situated at Zehra Gulshan Bagh, Erragadda, yousuguda, Hyderabad. Therefore, respondent No.4 has issued notice, dated 1I.12.2024 and thereafter, passed a

¶38

\ \ -,-;4}":::>' -'

¶39

KL,J W.P.No.30406 of 2025

I \

-'-=.::.,

speaking order, dated O4.OL.2O2S directing respondent No.5 to remove the unauthorized construction. Respondent No.5 has filed an application, dated 1g.12.2024 .with respondent No.2 seeking regularization of the said unauthorized construction in terms of Sections 455,4 and 455AA Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short the Act, 1955). Respondent No.S has hled a suit in O.S.No.5823 of 2024 against GHMC and petitioner has also fiied a suit in O.S.No.44OO of 2024 against GHMC and respondent No.S seeking mandatory injunction. The said suit is pending and the said application, dated 19.12.2024 submitted by respondent No.5 seeking regularization of the unaurthorized construction is also pending. Respondent No.2 will consider the said application subject to the result of the same, take action against respondent No.5 strictly in accordance with procedure laid down under the Act, 1955. The said written instructions are placed on record.

¶44

t I

¶45

In the light of the said submissions, this Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the application, dated 1a.I2.2O24 submitted by respondent

t i,

W.P.No.30406 of 2

No.S under Section 4554. and 455AA of tLLe Act, 1955 seeking regurlarization of the unauthorized construction and subject to the result of the same, respondr:nt No.4 sha1l take action against respondent No.5 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Act, 11)55 pursuant to the speaking order, dated 04.01.2025. However, he shall complete the said exercise within a period of fcur (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶50

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any,

¶51

pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed,

¶52

SD/.S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO {sqsrANT^REG|STRAR //TRUE COPY// l{i'! \ , sECTtoN oFFtcER

¶53

¶54

1 The Principal Secretary, I\rlunicipal Administration q/o ,,om Devetopment

¶55

Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana at i yderabad.

¶56

2 The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad-Municipa I Corporation, Tank Bund

¶57

I Road, Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Commissioner, Circle No.19, Borabanda, GHMC, Hyderabad 4 The As_sistant City planner, GHMC, Circle No.tg, goiaOanda, Hyderabad. Two CCs to GP FoR MCPL ADMN AND URBAI\i oEviL.oever.rr, rrigh Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. fouii

¶58

b one CC to SRt G.IMADHUS-UDHAN neoOv, A,j;o;ri" (CPUC) 7 one CC to SRt DARWESH CHANDRA SHEKAR, AJ;;c,ate [opUC] IB One CC to SRt MOHD ABDUL QUADEER, nOrocaie-tOpUCl Two CD Copies

¶59

SA GJP

)

HIGH COURT

DATED:0310212025

ORDER

WP.No.30406 of 2024

1 : STA I€ o
(
7
?ffi o
Iit JUN .D
at
I
, ll E c

¶67

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

¶68

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶69

(
s

Mohammed Adil v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Adil v. State of Telangana

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

Rekam Sadgunamma Vs The State of Telangana

D. Veera Mani, Vs Sri. M. Dans Kishore IAS

M/ s. Gayathri Gardens Gpr Layout Plot Owners Welfare Association Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Smt.B.Pushpalatha Vs The District Collector, R.R.District, Lakdikapool

Smt. Sabera Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Boddu Sai Kiran Vs The State of Telangana