Tera Chinnappa Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸¹

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 34677 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Tera Chinnappa_fed.dy, S/o. Late Tera Ram Reddy, Aged about 60 years occ- Business, Fl/o. Plot No.'l364, Road No.12, MLA Colony, Banlarahills, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Secretary Municipal Administration, and UIban Development Department, Secretariat Hyderaba'd.

¶12

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

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

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 any order or direction writ or writs more particularly on in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAIVTUS declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in issuing Demand Notice along with fee intimation to the petitioner letter No.013959/GHMCi6843/SLP-112023-BP Dt.05.08.2023, asking him to pay an amount of Rs.6,13,92,158/- by imposing arbitrary vacant land tax of Rs.2,96,5,648/- and compounding fee @33 % i.e., Rs.1 ,59,72,096/- an amount of Rs.3,02,65,350i- under Road impact fee and an amount of Rs.8,BB,4B2l- under Environment impact fee, apart from all other applicable taxes for grant of building permission and imposing interest on the demanded amount as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequenfly to set-aside the demand notice vide challan No.TS 13833912022 D1.05.08.2023, directing to issue correct demand notice to petitioner enabling petitioner to pay the applicable fee

¶15

in file

¶16

in pursuance of petitioner's building^application No.0'1 3959/G H I\4Cl6 843/S^{LP-l l 2023lBP, Dt.2B.12 2022.}

¶17

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition unde. section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed^{in support of the petition,the Highcourt may be pleasedto} direct the Respondent^{No.2 to give proper demand noticeby imposing correct} and applicable fee-t,:^{petitioner enabling to pay the fee in pursuance of petitioner} buitding application in^{file No.013959iGHMC/68431SLP-ll2023lBP,Dt.28.12.2022} to proceed with the^{,lonstruction pending disposalof the abovewritpetition'}

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI D.Y.N.L.N.CHARYULU}

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.1:AGP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV}

¶21

Counsel forthe Respondent^{No.2: SRt G.MADHUSUDHANREDDY,} SC FOR GHMC

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

T t

¶24

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.34677 of 2o.23

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned 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 No.2.} Perused the record.

¶28

Petitioner is claiming that he has^purchased undivided share of land to an extent^{of Ac.O-12.4gts., out} of Ac. l-26.31 gts., in Sy.No.196^{situated at Kondpur} Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga^{Reddy, under a} registered sale deed bearing document^{No.13053 of 2003,} dated 13.10.2003. His daughters^{have also purchased} Ac.O-10 gts of each in the^{very salne survey number} under registered sa-Ie deed^{bearing document Nos. 13054} of 2OO3 arrd 13220 of 2003 dated 13.10.2003^{and dated} 16.10.2003 respectively. However,^{petitioner made an}

¶29

2

¶30

KL, W.P.No.l4677 of 2023

¶31

application,,lated 28. 12.2022 to respondent No.,l, dated 05.08.2023 seeking permission for construction of Assembiy building consisting of 1 stilt+3 upper floors under TS-bPASS by way of self certihcation and self declaration. Jlespondent No.2 has issued a fee intimation letter, dated 05.08.2023. He has a-lso issued a demand notice, dated 05.08.2023 requesting the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.6,13,92,158/- under various heads including va.cant land tax, 33Yo compounding fee, building perrnit fees, Betterment Charges and External Betterment Charges on built up area etc. According to the petitioner, the said demand notice is not on consideratior. of the Rules, the same is baseless and exorbitant. They cannot demand 33%o compounding fee and a-lso vaci lt land tax. Therefore, challenging the said demand notr.ce, the petitioner hled the present writ petition

¶32

Whereas;, Sri G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Cor,rnsel appearing for respondent No.2, has

¶33

KL,J W.l'.No.34677 of 2023

¶34

J

¶35

I ! l i I I I

¶36

produced written instructions of the Additional Chief City

¶37

Planner, GHMC. The same are placed on record. In the

¶38

said instructions, he has stated as follows:

¶39

F The applicalt Sri.T.chinnappa Reddy & others (Petitioner herein ) have submitted the proposals for construction of Function Hall consisting of Stilt+3 upper floors in Sy.No. 196lpart situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District on the site area 70755.26Sq.m out of rr,'hich an extent of 548.O1 Sq.m indicated for road widening and net plot area 1O2O7.25 Sq.m vide file No.o13959/GHMC/6843/SLP /2o23-BP dated 13.ot.2023.

¶40

F It was observed that the applicant has commenced the construction work without prior permission and file was triggered to Revenue Department for remarks for ownership aspect and the hle was kept on hold. The District Collector, R.R.District through letter No.El/2157 /2023 dated 13.07.2023 has furnished remarks there is no Government interest is involved in the subject land i.e., Sy.No. 196 extent lO2O7 .25 Sq.m situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶41

) Further, it is to submit that the LRS proceedings and plans submitted by the applicant along with said building application were not found in respondent office.

¶42

) Whereas, it was observed that the applicant has laid stilt+2 upper floors and raised columns for 3'd floor. Further, it is also observed that the Deputy Commissioner, Circle No.2O, GHMC has issued show cause notice dated 19.O7 .2023 against the unauthorized construction.

¶43

) After receipt of remarks from District Coilector, R.R.District, the application was processed as per Section 455-4 of HMC Act, 1955 duly levying 33%

¶44

4

¶45

KL, W.P.No.34677 of²⁰²³

¶46

compounClng fee along with^{other applicablecharges} as per rLles and GOs^{and fee intimation letterdated} 05.08.20:23 was issued to the^{applicant for payment of} fees/charges with other^{conditions. Whereas,since} thc applicant has not^{paid the fees, the penaltygot} generatccl in online.

¶47

In pareLgraph No.9 of the writ^{afhdavit, petitioner} has stated that the said demand^{notice is not on} consideratiorl of the G.O and^{provision ofGreater} Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act^{and itis} erroneous. IJ'the authorities rectify the^{demand notice, he} will pay the same and^get the^{permissionto start} construction

¶48

Whereas, Sri G. Madhusudhan^{Reddy,learned} on Standing Counsel appearing for^{respondent No.2,} instructions, would submit that without^{waiting for the} building permission,^{petitioner started constructionand} he has constructed the shed.^{Challengingthe same, the} petitioner h,as fi1ed a writ petition vide^{W.P.No.2356 of} 2025 arnd the same was disposed^{on29.01.2025. There is} no provision for re-issuance of the^{demandnotice.} Petitioner htrs to make fresh application under^TS-bPASS

¶49

KL,J W.P.No.34677 of 2023

¶50

5

¶51

(I

¶52

by way of self certification and self declaration along with all the relevalt documents including LRS proceedings and plan etc.,. which were not hled along with the earlier building application. Respondent No.2 w.ill consider the same and issue building permit order in favour of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short^,the Act, 1955,) and TS-bPASS Rules 2020.

¶53

In the light of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to submit fresh application under TS-bPASS along with relevant documents including LRS proceedings and plan as pointed out by the Additional Chief City planner by way self certification and self declaration. On submission of the salne, respondent No.2 shall consider the same strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Act, 1955 and TS-bPASS Rules 2020. There shall be no order as to costs.

6

KL

W.P. No.34677 of²⁰²³

a

As a se,quel thereto,^{miscellaneous petitions,if any,}

¶59

pending in ttro Writ Petition^{shall stand closed'}