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

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1424

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, J.
M/s. Fair Fields Plot Owners Welfare Association - Appellant
Vs.
The Hyderabad Metropolitan Commissioner - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 17797 of 2009
Decided On : 04-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Gopala Rao Amancharla V
For the Respondent: V Narasimha Goudsc For HMDA

Land designated for public utilities cannot be repurposed without due process and violates public trust principles, necessitating demolition of unauthorized structures.

Headnote:(A) Telangana Societies Registration Act, 2001 - Public Trust Doctrine - Petition concerning encroachment into common utility area of a residential layout. - Respondent No.3 constructed unauthorized structures in areas reserved for public utilities, violating status quo order. Court held that land earmarked for parks cannot be converted for other purposes without due amendment. (Paras 15-21)

(B) Authorized Construction - The construction of an Anganwadi School without adherence to regulatory requirements and status quo orders is deemed illegal and the encroachment tantamount to violation of public trust principles. (Paras 12-16)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner society, representing owners of residential plots, contended that respondents attempted to encroach upon community utility areas allocated for common use, leading to the filing of a writ petition to restrain unauthorized construction. (Paras 5, 14)

Findings of Court:
The construction was in violation of the prior court order and the land was appropriated improperly, requiring demolition of the structures. The court affirmed that the reserved land must be preserved for its designated public purpose. (Paras 21, 23)

Issues: The primary issues pertained to the legality of construction on land reserved for public utilities, compliance with status quo orders, and locus standi of the petitioner association. (Paras 5, 20)

Ratio Decidendi: The court reinforced that private parties cannot convert common utility spaces without appropriate permissions and amendments to development plans, reiterating that public interest must prevail with respect to land use. (Paras 18, 19)

Result: Writ Petition disposed of directing demolition of unauthorized structures to restore public utility space.

Table of Content
1. formation of a community and the earmarking of public utility land. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. claims of the gram panchayat regarding public utility construction. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. legal contest about the right to land use and authority to construct. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. violation of court orders regarding land use. (Para 15 , 19 , 21)
5. court's directive for demolition and land restoration. (Para 23)

ORDER :

1. Heard Sri V. Gopal Rao Amanacharla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri V. Narsimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri Laxmaiah Kanchani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.7. Perused the record.

2. Petitioner herein is a registered society registered under the provisions of the Telangana Societies Registration Act, 2001 vide registration No.1016 of 2009. Owners of plots/houses/villas are the members of the petitioner’s association.

3. M/s. Fair Fields, a company, developed land admeasuring Ac.7-37 gts., in Sy.Nos.1 to 6, 15, 16 and 47P of Neknampur village, Rajendranagar Mandal on obtaining permission No.16/MP/2/4/03 on 27.02.2003. It was for development of a gated community. The said company developed layout as a gated community with two model houses along with a room for the Welfare Association in plot No.29, Sy.No.1 to 6, 15, 16 and 47P, Neknampur village. The said lay out was fenced at the time of approval by obtaining necessary permission. At the time of approval by respondent No.1 – HMDA, respondent No.1 has allocated certain areas for common public utility such as park, septic tanks, overhead water tank, garbage centers, etc., in the final layout. The members of the petitioner society purchased plots from the said company under valid registered sale deeds.

4. Respondent No.1 - HMDA informed respondent No.3 - the then Gram Panchayat, Neknampur about the approval and the areas earmarked for the purpose of common public utilities such as park, septic tank, overhead water tank, garbage centers, etc. The said areas earmarked are under the control and custody of respondent No.3 - the then Gram Panchayat, Neknampur and the petitioner association since 2003.

5. It is further contended by the petitioner that the Village Secretary in collusion with the Sarpanch of Neknampur Grampanchyat is trying to encroach into the common areas earmarked for the purpose of common utility for the resident’s welfare association and is trying to create third party interest by alienating the same. Therefore, they have submitted a representation dated 12.08.2008 to all the respondents with a request to stop the said construction. They have not stopped the construction. Therefore, petitioners have filed the present writ petition to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in not restraining respondent Nos.5 to 6 from interfering and encroaching into the common utility places earmarked for the purpose of petitioner’s association, as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to remove the structures, if any, made in the said open place earmarked for the purpose of common utility in the layout.

6. Respondent No.3 - Panchayat Secretary, the then Gram Panchyat, Neknampur filed counter admitting about the aforesaid layout issued by respondent No.1. It is contended that basing on the approved layout by the then HUDA, petitioner association has registered a gift deed in respect of four open spaces in favour of Neknampur Gram Panchayat, vide registered gift deed bearing document No.9193 of 2003, dated 10.12.2003. Thereafter, the HMDA released the said final layout. On registration of the said gift deed, the common public utility spaces, such as park, septic tanks, overhead water tank, garbage centers, etc., are vested with the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner has no right over the said public places.

7. It is also contended that the Mandal Parishad, Rajendra Nagar has proposed to construct Anganwadi building at Neknampur village. Accordingly, an amount

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