Back
2024 6 Supreme(Telangana) 718
IN THE HIGH COURT OF STATE OF TELANGANA
ALOK ARADHE, C.J., J. SREENIVAS RAO, J.
Syed Baquer Hussain - Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 38256 of 2022 and 28407 of 2023
Decided On : 28-10-2024
For the Appellant : Mohd. Adnan.
For the Respondents: K. Siddharth Rao and K. Giridhar Raju.
A petitioner invoking equity jurisdiction must approach the court with clean hands and disclose all material facts; suppression of facts undermines judicial integrity.
Headnote:(A) Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 - Section 636 - Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - Writ of Mandamus - Demolition of unauthorized construction - Petitioner claimed illegal demolition of roof and staircase over common passage; court found that petitioner constructed without sanction and suppressed material facts - Court emphasized the necessity of clean hands in equity jurisdiction. (Paras 12, 13, 14, 15, 16)
(B) Jurisdiction of Courts - A person invoking equity jurisdiction must approach the court with clean hands and disclose all material facts; suppression of facts undermines judicial integrity. (Paras 13, 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, owner of a property in Asif Nagar, challenged the demolition of a staircase and roof over a common passage, claiming it was illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner had previously obtained regularization for a structure that was later contested by a neighbor, leading to multiple legal proceedings. The petitioner was accused of constructing without proper sanction and suppressing facts regarding the existence of the third floor.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner had constructed the building without an approved plan and had not challenged the cancellation of the regularization proceedings, which had become final. The court emphasized that the petitioner approached the court with unclean hands.
Issues: The main issues were whether the demolition was illegal and whether the petitioner was entitled to relief given the suppression of material facts.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner was not entitled to relief due to the suppression of material facts and emphasized the principle that one must approach the court with clean hands. The jurisdiction of the Human Rights Commission was also questioned.
Result: Writ Petition No. 38256 of 2022 is dismissed and Writ Petition No. 28407 of 2023 is disposed of.
ORDER :
(J. Sreenivas Rao, J.)
1. W.P. No. 38256 of 2022 is filed for the following relief:
"That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an order, direction or a writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action on part of the respondents in demolishing the roof over common passage and attached staircase on the southern side of the petitioner's house bearing M.C. No. 10-2-347/B/51/A/A, situated at Asif Nagar, Hyderabad, is highly illegal, arbitrary, in violation of the GHMC Act and unconstitutional. Consequently, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to reconstruct the roof over common passage and attached staircase on the southern side of the petitioner's house bearing M.C. No. 10-2-347/B/51/A/A, situated at Asif Nagar, Hyderabad as per the plan and compensate the petitioner for causing mental agony and violation of statutory laws and constitutional rights and financial loss to a tune of Rs. 10,00,000/-(Rupees ten lakhs) and pass any other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstance of the case in the interest of justice."
W.P. No. 28407 of 2023 is filed for the following relief:
"That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an order, direction or a writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the Human Rights Commission, in giving demolition orders to the respondents No. 2 and 4, to demolish the stair case and roof belonging to the petitioner on the southern side of his house bearing M.C. No. 10-2-347/B/51/A/A, situated at Asif Nagar, Hyderabad, vide proceedings in HRC No. 260 of 2020, finally disposed off on 18th August 2022, is highly illegal, arbitrary and beyond the jurisdiction and scope of Protection of Human Rights Act. Consequently, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to compensate the petitioner for causing mental agony and violation of statutory laws and constitutional rights and financial loss to a tune of Rs. 10,00,000/-(Rupees ten lakhs) and pass any other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstance of the case in the interest of justice."
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in this order as per their ranking in Writ Petition No. 28407 of 2023.
3. Brief facts of the case:
3.1. The petitioner is claiming that he is owner of house bearing Door No. 10-2-347/B/51/A/A, situated at Asif Nagar, Hyderabad. Abutting to the said property on its south side, there was a house belonging to his daughter and she sold the same to one Mr.Abdul Muqeeth-respondent No. 5 and Mohammed Abdul Moyeed through registered sale deed in the year 2008. On the southern side of the petitioner's house, there is a staircase with a roof connecting the entrance and the said staircase exclusively meant for egress and ingress to his property. In the year 2010, he got regularization vide proceedings No. 4870/C7/CZ/2008, dated 05.07.2010, including the roof and staircase. He further averred that respondent No. 5 filed Writ Petition No. 25550 of 2011 against the petitioner and Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) to consider his representation for demolition to staircase and ramp connecting to the entrance of the petitioner's house and the same was dismissed on 10.07.2012. Again respondent No. 5 filed Writ Petition No. 40246 of 2012 for not taking action pursuant to the Notice No. 279/TPS/C7/W10/2012 dated 20.11.2012 and the said Writ Petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent Corporation to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, in case any illegal construction over the third floor of the petitioner's property. Aggrieved by the order dated 10.07.2012 in Writ Petition No. 25550 of 2011, respondent No. 5 filed Writ Appeal No. 1020 of 2012 and the same was dismissed on 02.07.2013 recording the regularization in respect of the subject property.
3.2. The petitioner further averred that the respondent Corporation without giving any notice and without follow
