The court upheld the respondent's actions as compliant with statutory codes and found the petitioner's objections unsubstantiated.

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25095 OF 2025 ORDER: (ORAL)

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not restoring the footpath and roads in the Rolling Hills Gated Community situated at Gachibowli, Hyderabad, in its original form as per the layout approved by the GHMC, as arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently, to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to restore the footpath and roads in the said gated community as per the approved layout.

2. The petitioner is the resident of the Rolling Hills Gated Community situated at Gachibowli, Hyderabad. He owns a villa in Plot No.B-34 in the said gated community. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 Association has removed the footpath in the gated community and utilising the same for parking area. If footpaths are removed and the residents start parking their vehicles on the road, it will cause significant trouble and hardship to the residents of the gated community in walking and it will also pose threat to the safety of the residents as well as children while walking on the road. The petitioner submitted representation dated 06.08.2025 to respondent No.2 regarding illegal and unauthorised activity of respondent No.4 in removing the footpath in the gated community, but so far action has not been taken.

3. It is stated that W.P.No.24545 of 2025 was filed by the petitioner questioning removal of footpaths and roads in the gated community, and the same was disposed of by order dated 20.08.2025 directing the respondent GHMC to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.08.2025 within a period of four weeks.

4. Heard Mr. R. Chandrashekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3; Mr. T. Sharath, learned counsel for respondent No.4; and perused the material available on record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the order dated 20.08.2025 passed in W.P.No.24545 of 2025, respondent No.3 has failed to take action against respondent No.4 and respondent No.4 is proceeding with work expeditiously by engaging more labourers and machinery and if relief as sought in the present writ petition is not granted, the petitioner and other residents of the gated community will suffer irreparable loss and injury.

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 submitted that respondent No.4 Association has not violated nor any deviation is made by the Association in respect of the sanctioned plan of the gated community. There is no attempt made by respondent No.4 to remove the footpath and earmark the same for vehicle parking. There is 6 feet way left open for utilising the same as footpath. 3 feet stretch thereafter lying above the road level has been used for laying utility lines (water channels and cables) and this is being misconstrued as footpath by the petitioner. The hardship which is projected by the petitioner is only temporary and as and when the channels/pipes are laid, the pits that are dug are immediately filled up and covered.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 further submitted that entire work undertaken by respondent No.4 has come to a standstill. There are 110 villas in the gated community and none of the villa owners have any grievance except the petitioner. The petitioner has some personal issues regarding his villa and the same will be sorted out by respondent No.4 Association. The work undertaken by respondent No.4 is for the common road of the gated community and to ease the traffic congestion.

8. Learned Standing Counsel for respon