THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.31317 OF 2023

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 to 5 in not taking any action against the 6^th respondent for illegal grabbing of public road, thereby blocking the daily passage on the southern side of the 6th respondent which is ingress and egress and not to the general public and also to the petitioner school students removing the illegal blockage of the public road by the respondent Nos.2 to 5, as being illegal, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and against the principles of GHMC Act.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development for respondent No.1, Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 5 and with their consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission. Having regard to the manner of disposal, notice to unofficial respondent No.6 is not necessary.

3. Petitioner contends that it had initially taken the premises bearing Municipal No.18-13-7/A/31 consisting of ground floor and first floor situated at Bandlaguda, Chandrayangutta, Hyderabad on lease, and thereafter purchased the same under a registered document dated 18.09.2013 from its owner.

4. Petitioner further contends that the 6^th respondent who is the neighbour is trying to grab the public road on the southern side of his house, which is GHMC road, thereby blocking his ingress and egress and also that of the general public in the locality.

5. Petitioner further contends that on noticing the steps being taken by the unofficial respondent to grab the public road, he had approached the respondent authority and gave a written complaint dated 14.05.2018 with a request to remove the unauthorized construction and thereby closing the public road, which is meant for using public only and not being a private road.

6. Petitioner further contends that, though the respondent authority acknowledged the petitioner’s complaint, no action is taken.

7. Petitioner further contends that the unofficial respondent once again started illegal activity of the land grabbing and is trying to grab the 20 feet existing public road on the north west side of the petitioner’s school and to block the same by virtue of the construction of a wall whereby the ingress and egress of the petitioner’s school students would be affected.

8. It is also contended by the petitioner that on noticing the aforesaid illegal activity of the 6^th respondent, it had approached the respondent Nos.2 to 5 authorities and made an oral request to restrain the 6th respondent to restrain the 6th respondent from encroaching on the public road and inspite of the above, no action is taken. Hence, this petition.

9. Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 5 has placed before this Court the written instructions under the signature of Deputy Commissioner, Circle No.8, GHMC dated 10.11.2023.

By the said written instructions, it is stated as under:

“In this regard, it is submitted that the petitioner has informed to the Respondent Corporation that the 6^th respondent is blocking the 20 feet wide public road thereby closing the ingress and egress to the petitioner school students and general public road and requesting to take necessary action. Accordingly, the official of respondent corporation have inspected the site and observed that there is an old existing house with tin sheets roofs in front side which seems to be constructed long back. The action is being initiated by the respondent corporation duly issuing notice to the 6th respondent calling upon to submit ownership documents for verification and to ascertain whether the 6^th respondent has made road encroachment.”

10. To the written instructions, the respondents have annexed the two pages containing six photographs therein for perusal of the Cour