M. Jayvardhan Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

M. Jayvardhan Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondents No.2 and 3 directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.01.2025, inspect the subject site, and, if the allegations are found true, take action against respondent No.5 strictly in accordance with the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 procedure, after putting respondent No.5 and the petitioner on notice and affording them a hearing, within four weeks of receipt of a copy of the order; notice to respondent No.5 dispensed with; no costs; interlocutory applications closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents No.2 and 3 were bound to act on the petitioner's representation dated 23.01.2025 complaining of unauthorised/illegal construction by respondent No.5, and what directions should issue in respect of the alleged illegal construction.

Court's answer

Notice to respondent No.5 was dispensed with and the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.01.2025, inspect the subject site, and, if the allegations made by the petitioner are found true, take action against respondent No.5 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955.

Ratio / Principle

Action against respondent No.5, if allegations are found true, is to be taken by following the procedure in the Act (Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955), putting respondent No.5 and the petitioner on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing.

Key takeaways

Respondents No.2 and 3 were directed to complete the said exercise within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, with no costs; as a sequel, pending interlocutory applications stand closed.ratio¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (K. Lakshman J), W.P. No.3676 of 2025 (decided 10.02.2025): A resident of Ambedkar Nagar, Yellareddyguda, Ameerpet filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandamus to demolish the alleged illegal construction of respondent No.5 and for consequential enquiry, alleging inaction by respondents No.2 and 3 (ACP Town Planning and Deputy Commissioner, Circle-17, Khairatabad) on his representation dated 23.01.2025 despite acknowledgement. The learned Standing Counsel for GHMC stated that respondent No.5 had obtained an interim injunction on 06.11.2024 in I.A.No.2813 of 2024 in O.S.No.5036 of 2024 (IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad) which was pending and subsisting, that an existing stilt + 4 upper floor building stood on the site with no ongoing construction, and that officials would visit the site and act if the allegations were found correct. Dispensing with notice to respondent No.5, the Court disposed of the petition directing respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the representation, inspect the site, and, if the allegations were found true, take action against respondent No.5 strictly per the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, putting respondent No.5 and the petitioner on notice and affording them a hearing, completing the exercise within four weeks of receipt of the order copy. No costs; interlocutory applications closed.

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

\

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry-FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 3676 OF 2025

Between:

M. Jayvardhan, S/o M. Venkatesh, Aged about 25^years, Occ: Self employee, Ryo 8-3-430/1 18, Ambedkar nagar, Yellareddy Guda, Ameerpet^{- 500073.}

...PETITIONER

AND

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary of Municipal Administration Urban Development Secretariat, Hyderabad, T.S.- 500022

2 The ACP Town Planning, Circle^-17, Khairatabad Road, Taj Enclave, Khairatabad, Hyderabad - 500004. Rep. by Syed Sayeeduddin

J The Deputy Commissioner, Circle - 17, Khairatabad Road, Taj Enclave, Khairatabad, Hyderabad - 500004.

4 The GHIvIC Commissioner, CC Complex Tank Bund Road, Lower^TankBund Hyderabad - 500063.

( Basa Balaraju Yadav, S/o Unknown, Age.Major, Occ. Employee,^R/oB-3- 430194, Ambedkar nagar, Yellareddy Guda, Ameerpet^- 500073.

...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 directions more^particularly oneⁱⁿ the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the official^{respondents to demolishthe} illegal constructions made by the respondent^{no. 5 situated at H' No. 8-3-430/94,} Ambedkar nagar, Yellareddy Guda, Ameerpet^{500073,as the inactionof the} respondent authorities is illegal arbitrary^{and unconstitutiona I and againstthe} provisions under GIIMC Act, consequentially direct the Respondent^{no. 1 to 4 to} pass the appropriate orders by conducting the enquiry upon the^illegal construction, which are making^{illegally in the above said Sy. No.311, 312, 313'} 314,315,3/6 to the extent of 50 sq.^yards.

i

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition unCer {)ection 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances^statedin the affidavit filed in s upport of the^petition, the High Cor-rrt^may :e^{pleased to} direct Respondent Nrt 3 and other respondents^{to depcse the representation} dated 2310112025 and^pending disposal of the above^{writ petitton.}

Counsel for the F'etitioner: SRI PEDDAPALLY SAI^KIiRAN

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

Counsel for the Flespondent No.2 to 4: SRI MIDDE ARUN KUMAR, SC FOR GHMC

Counsel for the t{espondent No.5: - -^{- -}

The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BT^F'- SRIJUSTICE K.I-AKSHMAN Vrit Pe trtIon No.3676 of 2025

Order:

Fleard leamed counsel for the peritioner and Sri Midde Arun Kumar, leamed Standing C-ounsel appearing for respondents No.2 to 4.

Petitioner is resident of Ambedkar Nagar, Yellareddlguda, Ameeqpet. Respondent No.5 is also resident of the sarne area and he is proceeding wlth consrrucrion unauthorisedly. Therefore, petitioner has submimed represenrarion dared 23.0t.2025 to respondents No.2 and 3. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, respondents I$o.2 and 3 did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondents No.2 and 3, petitioner filed the present writ petition.

Sri Midde Arun Kumar, leamed Standing Counsel appearing for respondents No.2 to 4, on instructions, would submit rhat respondent No.5 had filed a suit uide O.S.No.5036

-*'1 .-\

2

\

of 2024 ilgairlst respondent^{No.4 for perpe'tual miunction'} Leamed IV Additional Junior^Gvil Judge,^{City CivilC-ourt,} Hyderaba,l, 1;ranted^{interim injunctionon 06'11')-024in} 1.ANo.2813^('l: 2024 in^{O.S.No.5O36of 2024-The said suit is} pending and the said^{interim injunctionis alsc' subsisring'He} would fu:the:' submit, on^{instructions, that} ':here^{is existing} builcLng^{consistingof stilt + 4 upperfloon and re:'pondent} No.5 is not proceeding^{with any constmction'Ilorrever'} respondents No.2^{arrd 3 will visit the subject site and if the} allegations^{madeby petitionerare found to be conect'then} theywill^{r.ake actionagainstrespondent No'5'}

\

In the^{lLght of aforesaid submission, noticeto re spondent} No.5 is^{rJisp,:nsedwith and this \X/rit Petitionis dir;posedof} directing^{resltondentsNo.2 and 3 to considerthe petitioner's} represeil.ation^{dated 23-01.2025,inspect the subject site and if} the allegatior,s^{made bythe petitionerare found to be tme' take} action ag;ainst^{respondentNo.5 strictlyin accordanc': t'ith the}

::3::

I

procedure laid down in the Greater Hl.derabad Municipal Colporation Act, 1955 (for short the Act) by puning respondent No.5 and petitioner on norice and after affording them an opporruniryof hearing. Respondents No.2 and 3 shall

complete the said exercise within a period of four weel<s from

the date of receipt of a copyof this order. No costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applicatiors, pending lf any,

stand closed.

SD/. N. RAJ^GOPAL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

sectkrrrcea

To,

1 . The Principal Secretary^{of Municipal Administration Utban Development' The} Si;t; ;i i6;"gana,^{S6cretariat, Hvderabad, T'S - 500022}

2 in? bioririb-dmmissio^{nei, C iicte'- t t, Khai ratabad Road' Taj Enclave'} Khairatabad, HYderabad^{- 500004.}

i;; GiiMC^{bofrrmissionerl6dbomplexTank Bund Road} '^{LowerTankBund} Hvderabad^- 500063.

6i,i"cd t i^s ni^{Fe-o onpnllYsAl Kl RAN,Ad vocate^[of-u p],} 5. il; cc io Sni^{rvrtooe ARUN KUMAR,Sc-rpf} -c!Y9^toP!91 .. 6. iffi ddr'i"-ci^{Fon lluNrctpAl ADMlNlsrRArloN& URBAN} D'iViLoPMEirli,^{riighcourt for the stateof relangana' [oUT]}

Two CD CoPies BN GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 0102,t2025

I

ORDER

WP.No.3676 of 2025

o( TE(,1 o
,]. u,l <br>s
:<br>--.f
l-l $
\ q
jj) *
'l lt,,

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

./tA 1','1 ^',/5^/4,