Partly allowed

Gowrishetty Krishna Murthy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Sept 2026WP/30092/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the sealing of a building. The Court directed unsealing of the sanctioned portion (Ground, Stilt, 2 Upper Floors) while maintaining the seal on the unauthorized upper three floors pending regularization.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 4 to unseal Ground, Stilt, and 2 Upper floors; seal on unauthorized 3rd, 4th, and 5th floors to remain.

Gowrishetty Krishna Murthy Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 30092 OF 2026

¶8

Between:

¶9

Gowrishetty Krishna Murthy, S/o. G. Jayaramulu, Aged about 49 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.7-85, Madhurapuri Colony, Road No.4, Near Sai Ram Hospital, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Malkajgiri Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Hyderabad.

¶14

The Malkajgiri Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Zonal Commissioner, L.B.Nagar Zone, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Malkajgiri Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Dy.Commissioner, Saroornagar Circle-1 2, Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

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 a writ or more in the nature of a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of 4 No. Respondent Nos.2 to issuing sealing notice 86/TPS/DC/C|R12|LBZMMC|2026, dt.18.07.2026 for the entire building bearing H.No.'13-8-91 (New), 8-91 (Old), constructed on Plot No.14 Southern Part, admeasuring 200 Sq. Yards or 167.23 Sq. Mtrs., in Sy.No.248, situated at Gaddiannaram Village, Saroornagar Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, including the duly sanctioned Stilt⁺ 2 Upper Floors covered by Building Permit File

¶18

No,01 8077/GHMC/04856/IABP lC5l2O25 and permit No.3660/GHMC ilNCS|2O}S, daled 17.10.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of the principles of natural^justice, and consequently direct Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to unseal the permitted Stilt + 2 Upper Floors which is covered by Building permit File No.01 8077/GHMCiO4856/IABP lC5l2O25 and Permit No.3660/GHMC ilNCSt2OZ5, dated 17.10.2025.

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026

¶20

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 to direct Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to unseal the Stilt + 2 Upper Floors covered by Building Permit File No.018077/GHMC/04856/IABP tCStzO2S and permit No.3660/GHMCllNC512025, dated 17.10.2025, in respect of house bearing H,No.13-B-91 (New), 8-91 (Old), constructed on Ptot No.14, Southern part, admeasuring 200 Sq. Yards or^'167.23 Sq. Mtrs., in Sy.No.24B, situated at Gaddiannaram Village Saroornagar Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ petition,

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PADALA PRAVTN KUMAR

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.'l: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV

¶23

rSounsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDy, SC FOR MMC

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD

¶26

HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE B. VIIAYSEN REDDY

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.3CI92 OF 2026

¶28

(CNR No. H BH c070622902026)

¶29

DATE OF ORDER: 70.09.2026

¶30

Between:

¶31

Gowrishetty Krishna Murthy

¶32

...Petitioner

¶33

AND

¶34

The State of Telangana Represented by its Principal Secretary Municipal Administrafion and Urban Development Department Secretariat, Hyderabad and others

¶35

...Respondents

¶36

ORDER:(ORAL)

¶37

Heard Mr. Padala Pravin Kumar, Iearned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for MMC, appearing for respondents No.2 to 4; and perused the material on record.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was granted building permission oide permit No.3661/GHMC/IA/ C5/ 2025 dated 17.1,0.2025 for construction of Ground + stilt + 2 rpper floors over the property bearing H.No.13-8-91 (old No.8-91), Plot No.14 (southern part) in Survey No.248, situated at Goutham Nagar, Gaddiatuuuarn as against which the petitioner constructed Stilt + 5 upper floors. As three (3) floors were unauthorizedly constructed, the petitioner applied for regularization on 03.M.2026 under Sections 455-4 and 455-AA of the Greater Hvderabad

¶39

¶40

Municipal^{Corporation Act' 1955 (for short'Act')'Thereafter' W P No 25946 of} 2026^{wasfiledwhich was disposedof by the order datecl06 08 2026 directing} respondent^{No.2 to considerthe regularization application of the petitioner} dated^{03 08.2026}

¶41

The^{grievarncc.of the petitioneris that the entirebuildingconshuctedby} the petitioner^{rvas sealed pursuantto the imPugnecl noticeuide Notice} No.86/TI5/DC /^{CIR'12 / Ltsz / \n.MlC / 2026 dated18 07'2026 Learned counsel} for the^{petitionelrequested this Court that sealingof the subiect proPerty to the} extent^{of Ground+ Stiit + 2 upper floors constructed in accordancewith the} sanctioned^{plan mav be removed and the sealing may be confined only to the} extent^{of 3'd, 4h and 5rh floors'}

¶42

Learned^{Standing Counsel for MMC submittedthatthe regularization} aPPlicarion^{of the petitioneris pending and as unauthorized construction was} made by^{the petihoner' the subiectProPerty wassealed pursuantto the} impugned^{notice tlated 't8 07 '2026 underSection 461-A of the Act'}

¶43

In the light^{oi the abovesubmissions and takingnoteof the fact that Stilt} + 2 upPer floors^{havebeen constructecl as per thc sanctionedplanand the} remaining 3rd,^{4trr and 5ft floors have been admittedly constructed} unuathorizedlv, thjs writ petition^{is disposedof directing lesPondentNo.4 tO} unseal the Ground + Stilt + 2 upper floors over the propertl' bearing H.No.13-8-

¶44

¶45

91 (old No.8-91),^{PlotNo.14 (southernpart) in Survey No'248' situated at} Goutham Nagar,^{Gaddiannaram. The sealing affectedto the extentof} unauthorized^{3.a, 4*' and 5ft floor over the proPerty bearingH'No13-8-91 (old} No.8-91), Plot^{No.14 (southernpart) in Survey No'248' situatedat Goutham} Nagar, Gaddiaruvram,^{shall continueuntil disposalof the regularization} application submitted^{by the petitioner dated03.08.2026.There shall be no} order as to^costs

¶46

As a sequel thereto,^{miscellaneousapplications,il any' pending in the} writ petitiory stand closed' sD/-^p.pRAMoD

¶47

sD/-^p.pRAMoDNAIK / rsii-drirnr^{neclsrRAR t} //rRuE coPY// 6

SECTTON^OFFICER

To,

1 rhe^principar ^^{s"g1"_ll[vr,,,]il]"Jffi'","*['Eii..,3t:"f]",r;;Il""t'} B.R.Ambedkar^Secretart

¶52

¶53

2.TheCommissioner,MalkajgiriMunic"Malkajg ri i palCorporation,Hyderabad, Municipal^{Corporation'L B Nagar Zone'}

¶54

1. The^{Zonal Commissioner'}

¶55

?I!11::lmmissioner,^{Malkajsiri Municipalcorporation' saroomasarcircle-}

¶56

^ 12, Hyderabad'

¶57

One^{CCto SRI PADALA PRAVIN KUMAR' Advocate IOPUCI}

¶58

One^{CC to SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY' SC FOR MMC IOPUC]}

¶59

7 Two CCs to GP^{FOR MCPL ADMN URBANDEV'High Court for the State of}

¶60

' i"r.ng"nu, at Hyderabad [OUTI

¶61

Two^{CD CoPies}

¶62

BSR M,

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1010912026

ORDER

WP.No.30092 of 2026

'iltL
.e.
.,)
(
(_) ,
1 s srP 2i)2s
.s
.\ 1':TC1 ',1.
-.::---' '.i/

¶69

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶70

WITHOUT COSTS

¶71

-!,4\
1b
q

Gowrishetty Krishna Murthy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gowrishetty Krishna Murthy 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases