ORDER:

Heard Sri S. Sridhar, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for 2^nd respondent and Sri N. Krishna Sumanth, learned counsel appearing for 3^rd respondent.

2. Petitioners are claiming that they are the absolute owners and possessors of land admeasuring 3993 sq.yards in Survey No.160 situated at Mylardevpally Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, on the strength of a registered Sale Deed bearing document No.16392 of 2006 dated 29.11.2006. With an intention to construct 1 cellar + 3 stilt and 22 upper floors over the subject property, they have submitted application dated 18.10.2023 before 2^nd respondent – Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC), rep. by its Commissioner, Hyderabad, with a request to accord permission. On receipt of the said application, 2^nd respondent has issued intimation letter dated 09.11.2023 requesting petitioners to pay an amount of Rs.3,99,30,350/- towards building permit fee. According to petitioners, they have paid the said amount in instalments and filed proof of payment of the same. Petitioners have also executed registered Simple Mortgage Deeds bearing No.4979, 4980 and 4981 of 2024, dated 15.06.2024. They have also executed registered Gift Settlement Deed bearing document No.4978 of 2024 dated 15.06.2024 in favour of 2^nd respondent. 2^nd respondent is not considering the said application of petitioners and releasing the building permit order. On enquiry, 2^nd respondent informed petitioners that 3^rd respondent has filed a suit vide O.S.No.596 of 2022 against petitioners seeking perpetual injunction.

3. Sri S. Sridhar, learned counsel for petitioners would contend that suit schedule property is different to the property in respect of which the petitioners submitted aforesaid application to 2^nd respondent seeking permission for construction. However, 2^nd respondent cannot decide title disputes including identification of the subject property. 2^nd respondent has to consider prima facie title and possession of petitioners over the subject property in terms of Section 7 of TG-bPASS Act, 2020. Aggrieved by the said inaction of 2^nd respondent in not releasing the building permit order, petitioners filed the present Writ Petition.

4. Sri N. Krishna Sumanth, learned counsel appearing for 3^rd respondent, on instructions, would submit that 3^rd respondent is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring 20 guntas in Survey No.160 Part situated at Mylardevpalli Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, on the strength of registered Sale Deed bearing document No.6743 of 2003 dated 31.05.2003. She is in possession of the said property. Learned trial Court granted interim injunction vide order dated 05.07.2022 in I.A.No.281 of 2022 in O.S.No.596 of 2022 and the said I.A. is pending and interim injunction is subsisting. It is further contended that 3^rd respondent has already executed a registered Agreement Of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney with possession vide document No.9941 of 2018 dated 11.09.2018 in favour of S.A. Builders and Developers.

5. Sri S. Sridhar, learned counsel for petitioners would submit that GHMC is not a party to the said suit and the suit schedule property and the subject property are different. However, 2^nd respondent cannot consider the said aspects in terms of Section 7 of TG-bPASS Act, 2020.

6. Sri Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for 2^nd respondent, on instructions, would submit that 2^nd respondent will consider application dated 18.10.2023 submitted by petitioners seeking permission for construction of 1 Cellar + 3 Stilt + 22 Upper Floors, and pass orders strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, and also TG-bPASS Act, 2020, by putting petitioners and 3^rd respondent on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing.

7. In the light of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing