SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(AP) 8

High Court of Andhra Pradesh
NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J.
Mirza Khusru Ali Baig & Others
Versus
The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep. by its Commissioner & Another
W.P. No. 37621 of 2012
Decided On : 04-01-2013

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:N. Ashwani Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, Dr. Y. Padmavathi, R2, M.A.K. Mukheed, Advocates.

Headnote:Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act 1955 - Section 450---Cancellation of building permit on basis of complaint lodged/representation made by Wakf Board to Commissioner alleging encroachment by petitioners upon adjacent land belonging to a mosque cannot be countenanced when copy of representation was not furnished along with show cause—Petitioners allowed to carry on constructions in terms of building permit.

Judgment :

This Writ Petition is instituted seeking a writ of mandamus for declaring the action of the 1st respondent Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation in cancelling through their proceedings dated 24.11.2012 the building permit, granted to the petitioners as on 01.05.2012, as illegal.

The case of the petitioners is that one Smt. Tashjeebunissa Begum purchased a vast extent of immovable property of approximately 15870 square yards which is known as Mumtaj Mansion near AC Guards, Hyderabad, at a public auction conducted by the competent authority of evacuee properties. It appears, the public auction was conducted on 06.01.1962. The competent authority has also granted the necessary sale certificate in her favour on 14.08.1963. Smt. Tashjeebunnisa Begum is stated to have died on 27.09.1976 and her husband and children seemed to have succeeded to her estate. Even her husband, Mr. Asif Ali Baig is stated to have died on 10.09.1986 and it is now stated that petitioners 1 to 4 herein are the legal heirs of Mr. Asif Ali Baig. It is stated further that, from the above estate, during the lifetime of Mr. Asif Ali Baig and Smt. Tashjeebunnisa Begum, certain extents of open lands have been sold to 3rd parties, while retaining still substantial extents of land with them. Petitioners 1 to 4 herein, with an intention to develop the subject property, entered into a registered development agreement-cum-general power of attorney on 14.05.2010 with M/s Tirumala Constructions, a partnership firm. Thereafter, the petitioners have approached the 1st respondent Municipal Corporation for securing a building permission. The petitioners have also applied for grant of a ‘No Objection Certificate’ and the Joint Collector, Hyderabad District has referred the matter for the purpose of securing confirmation, to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, so that the genuineness of the sale certificate granted in favour of Smt. Tashjeebunnisa Begum can be ascertained. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, it appears, has confirmed, through his proceedings dated 21.08.2010 that the sale certificate granted by the competent authority of evacuee properties at Bombay in favour of Smt. Tashjeebunnisa Begum is a valid one. Thereupon the Joint Collector, Hyderabad District, through his endorsement, dated 29.09.2010, granted a ‘No Objection Certificate’ in an extent of 2082 square meters for the purpose of considering sanction of building plan by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. It was made clear that the said endorsement does not constitute any title or right over the said land by the applicant. By a similarly-worded endorsement, dated 04.11.2010, another ‘No Objection Certificate’ was accorded by the Joint Collector over land of an extent of 281 square meters for the purpose of construction of a building. Taking these ‘No Objection Certificates’ into account and consideration and duly considering the applications submitted by the petitioners for construction of a building, comprising of ground + four upper floors, the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation accorded necessary building permit on 01.05.2012, subject to the conditions specified therein. It is the case of the petitioners that they have started construction of a building in accordance with the building permit and they have not deviated while making constructions with regard to the said building permit. However, on 31.10.2012, a show cause notice was issued by the Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, requiring the petitioners to show cause why the building permit granted on 01.05.2012 should not be cancelled in accordance with the provisions contained under Section 450 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’). The petitioners have submitted a representation dated 08.11.2012, which was received in the Office of the Commissioner as well as the office of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation on 09.11.2012. Since the show cause notice da
















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top