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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 22773

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
K. RAMULU – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 39086/2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF

TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

W.P.No.39086 of 2025

Date: 19.12.2025

Between:

K. Ramulu

...petitioner

AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal

Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat,

Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad and five others.

...respondents

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the

4th respondent in interfering with petitioner’s peaceful

possession by obstructing the construction of petitioner’s

individual residential building in plot No.31 (Southern

Part), street/road Goudapuri, Locality ‘Ashok Colony’. in

Sy. Nos.522 (part), 523 and 524, situated at Kapra village,

##PAGE2##

2 EVV,J

W.P.No.39086 of 2025

Kapra Mandal, Kapra Circle-1, LB Nagar Zone, Medchal-

Malkajgiri District, despite the valid building permission

and work commencement letter granted by the

respondent Nos.5 and 6, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri Chatla Madhu, learned counsel for

the petitioner, Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant

Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the

respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri P. Sreenivasa Rao, learned

Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 and 6.

Perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that the petitioner is legally in possession of the

subject property and for which, the 5th respondent-GHMC

has sanctioned building permission in favour of the

petitioner vide TG-bPASS Building Permit Order bearing

Application No./Permit No.431020GHMC151172024,

Permit No.4310207988GHMC2024 dated 04-09-2024 and

thereafter, he started construction of residential building.

While it is so, the respondent No.4 is trying to dispossess

the petitioner from the subject land based upon the

##PAGE3##

3 EVV,J

W.P.No.39086 of 2025

complaint filed by the local people. He would further

submit that the local people due to the personal grudge

against the petitioner filed a complaint stating that the

subject land is under revenue enquiry and is alleged to be

the ‘Government land’. Based upon which, the 4th

respondent acted upon and inspected the building and

unilaterally decided that the petitioner had encroached

the existing Kapra Lake Nala Buffer Area situated at

Ashoka Colony, on the strength of the building permit

granted by the 5th respondent. He would further submit

that no notice was issued to the petitioner before

conducting any inspection and without issuing any notice

conducting inspection in the property of the petitioner is

per se illegal and seeks to pass appropriate orders.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Revenue would submit that since it has been found that

the petitioner has illegally encroached the existing kapra

buffer area, it is impermissible and contrary to the subject

building permit granted by the 5th respondent and is

violation of the conditions as contemplated in the said

##PAGE4##

4 EVV,J

W.P.No.39086 of 2025

building permit. He would further submit that building

permission sanctioned was subject to certain conditions as

per Clause 5.f (i) to (vii) (xi), (xiv) of G.O.Ms.No.168 dated

07-04-2012. Therefore, having received the complaint

from the local people, necessary inspection was conducted

pertaining to the land covered in the buffer area but not

the land of the petitioner by the official respondents and

since it has been noticed that the petitioner has been

encroached upon the property of the buffer zone, necessary

caution has been given to the petitioner not to proceed

until the joint survey will be conducted along with officials.

Despite the said oral caution given to the petitioner, the

petitioner is continuing the said construction and

therefore, seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent

Nos.5 and 6 has contended in the similar lines as

contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader

for the Revenue.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by the

learned counsel on both sides, and upon a careful

##PAGE5##

5 EVV,J

W.P.No.39086 of 2025

consideration and examination of the

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top