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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 32136

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
T. VINOD KUMAR, J
P.Venkatesh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP/13484/2024



THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.13484 of 2024

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Housing, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri B.Jagan Madhav Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of 2nd respondent and perused the record. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

2. Petitioner contends that he is the owner of plot bearing No.143/part (Eastern side portion) admeasuring 100 sq. yards in Sy.No.134 part, Green Hills Housing Colony situated at Bahadurpally village under the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent Municipality.

3. Petitioner further contends that on purchase of the aforesaid plot of land under a registered sale deed on 14-12-2023, he intended to construct a residential building and approached the 2nd authority and obtained permission for construction of a building consisting of stilt for parking + 2 upper floors on

18-02-2023.

4. Petitioner further contends that while he has made construction of the aforesaid building as per the sanction plan, the official of the 2nd respondent are visiting petitioner’s property and are trying to raze the same to ground by using bulldozer, which action, it is contended as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law as the authorities are not following due process of law.

5. Per contra, learned standing Counsel appearing on behalf of 2nd respondent submits that though the petitioner had obtained building permission for construction of stilt for parking + 2 upper floors, had made construction beyond the approved plan and had raised an extra floor thereon.

6. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that in order to cause verification of the construction made in deviation of the sanction plan, the authorities have caused inspection of petitioner’s building; and that the authorities would take further action by following due process of law.

7. I have taken note of respective contentions urged.

8. Having regard to the submissions made as above, since, the respondent authorities have found the construction made by the petitioner to be in deviation of the sanction plan, this Court is of the view that the 2nd respondent should be directed to follow due process of law while taking action against the aforesaid unauthorised construction made in deviation of the sanctioned plan, to bring the construction made by the petitioner in conformity with the sanctioned plan.

9. Subject to above observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

10. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand closed.

____________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date: 11.06 .2024 Vsv

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top