COMMON ORDER:

Since, the lis involved in these Writ Petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this Common Order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Sri B.Jagan Madhav Rao, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respective respondents in all the writ petitions, and with the consent of the counsel appearing for the parties, these Writ Petitions are taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioners, in brief, is that they had obtained separate building permissions through TS- bPASS online process for construction of individual residential houses consisting of ground floor; that after obtaining the permissions, they were issued with show-cause notices calling upon them to submit explanation, as to why the building permissions obtained by them should not be revoked; and that they had submitted explanations to the said show-

cause notices on 08.02.2024.

4. Petitioners further contend that the respondents-authorities, even after receiving the explanations of the petitioners to the show-cause notices issued, without passing any order thereon, are interfering with the ongoing construction of the petitioners.

5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.2 & 3 submits that the authorities on receiving the explanations from the petitioners, dt.08.02.2024, passed separate Speaking Orders dt.09.02.2024, revoking the building permissions granted to the petitioners by exercising powers conferred under Section 174(4) & (10) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 (for short ‘the Act’).

6. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the aforesaid orders of revocation have been served on the petitioners by uploading the same on the TS-bPASS online portal and as such the petitioners cannot claim that the said speaking orders having not been served on them.

7. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.

8. This Court in W.P. No.9976 of 2024, dt.19.04.2024, while dealing with the similar contention had held that invocation of power conferred under Section 174(4) (10) of the Act can only be resorted to before expiry of 21 days and after the expiry of 21 days from the date of building permission being obtained, the said permission can only be revoked under Section 176(9) of the Act.

9. Admittedly, in the facts of the present case, the authorities did not choose to invoke Section 176(9) of the Act and on the other hand, invoked Sections 174(4) (10) of the Act, which in the considered view of this Court is not the correct provision for revoking the building permissions granted in favour of the petitioners.

10. Further, it is also to be noted that though the respondents- authorities claim to have served the orders of revocation, dt.09.02.2024 on the petitioners by uploading the same on the TS-bPASS online portal, this Court in WP.No.9959 of 2024, dt.19.04.2024, while rejecting a similar submission had held that since the TS-bPASS Act, 2020 does not provide for means of service of the notice/summons/order by uploading the same on the TS-bPASS online portal, the same is required to be served by resorting to the mode of service prescribed under the respective enactments, namely GHMC Act, 1955 or Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019.

11. Thus, considered from any angle, the action of respondents- authorities in interfering with the ongoing construction being made by the petitioners pursuant to their respective building permissions obtained, without following due process of law, cannot be held to be a valid exercise of power conferred under the Act.

12. Accordingly, the impugned revocation orders are set aside and the respondents-authorities are directed not to interfere with the ongoing construction of the petitioners except by following due process of law.

13. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No order as to co