ORDER :

1. Since the issue involved in both these matters is intrinsically connected, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

2. Sri Shabeer Khan, petitioner in W.P. No. 20102 of 2020 has filed the writ petition seeking a direction to the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (‘GHMC’) to take steps to prevent the running of cement and steel godown and sales in the name of ‘Sri Vijaya Lakshmi Steels’ by the respondent No. 3 in the premises owned by respondent No. 4.

3. Whereas, Sri Vijaya Lakshmi Steels filed W.P. No. 17275 of 2021 (respondent No. 3 in W.P. No. 20102 of 2020) challenging the action of the Deputy Commissioner, Circle No. 19, GHMC, in issuing notice, dated 27.01.2021 under Section 461(A) of the GHMC Act, 1955 and the subsequent seizure of the shop.

4. For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P.No. 20102 of 2020 are narrated.

5. The petitioner is the owner of premises bearing H.No.8-3-228/7, Rahamat Nagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. The adjacent owner i.e., the respondent No.4 had let out the premises to respondent No.3 for running business of godown for cement and steel stockage and other construction supply. Since the respondent No. 3 is using the residential premises for running commercial activities and as the cement dust is polluting the air and spreading to the neighbouring areas, the loading and unloading of steel is causing noise pollution, the petitioner had filed various representations before the GHMC complaining about the commercial activity being carried on by the respondent No.3. As a result, the premises, in which the respondent No.3 is carrying out the business, was sealed by the GHMC. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent No.3 filed W.P.No.47887 of 2018 alleging that the officials of GHMC have seized the premises without taking into consideration the fact that there is a valid provisional trade licence issued in favour of respondent No.3 for the year 2018-19 and being renewed from time to time. This Court by order dated 02.01.2019 set aside the order of seizure holding that “whether the petitioner’s business is causing pollution and nuisance is required to be objectively considered by the respondent authorities keeping in view the businesses that are being permitted by them in the surrounding areas and in the present case, admittedly, no notice was issued to the petitioner before sealing the premises….”.

6. Subsequent, to the disposal of the said writ petition, the petitioner again filed complaints to the GHMC as well as Pollution Control Board against the business activity being carried out by the respondent No.3. Alleging inaction on the part of the GHMC in taking action on the representations/complaints of the petitioner, W.P. No. 20102 of 2020 is filed.

7. On 16.11.2020, this Court while ordering notice before admission in W.P. No.20102 of 2020 directed the GHMC to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 02.03.2020 and pass necessary orders duly putting on notice all the interested parties. As a result, the officials of GHMC have issued notice to the respondent No.3 on 27.01.2021 under Section 461(A) of GHMC Act, 1955. As no report was filed before this court, again, by order dated 24.03.2021, this Court directed the GHMC officials to comply with the orders dated 16.11.2020 and file a compliance report by 07.06.2021. In compliance with the orders of this Court, the officials of GHMC, after considering the representation submitted by the respondent No.3, seized the premises on 12.07.2021. Challenging the said seizure and the notice, dated 27.01.2021, the respondent No.3 filed W.P. No. 17275 of 2021.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material available on record.

9. For better adjudication of the matter, W.P.No.17275 of 2021 is taken up for adjudication before taking up W.P. No.20102 of 2020.

10. Coming to W.P. No.17275 of 2021, the learned counsel for the petitioner-Sri Vijaya Lakshmi Steels, submits that the petitioner has been car