IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.2 of 2024

In/and

WRIT PETITION No.29276 of 2024

Date 16.12.2025

WRIT PETITION No.29276 of 2024

Between:

Guntupalli Narasimha Rao

… Petitioner

AND

The State of Telangana,

Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

Panchayat Raj Department,

Secretariat, Hyderabad and four others.

…Respondents

COMMON ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the notices dated

09.09.2024 and 14.10.2024 issued by respondent No.5, directing the writ petitioner to produce documents and to halt the construction until further orders, in respect of a residential house in Sy.No.890/AA situated at Thallada Village and Mandal, Khammam District, as illegal

and arbitrary.

2. Heard K. Ujjawal Babu, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, appearing for respondents No.1, 3 & 4, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent No.2, Sri K. Pradeep Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat, appearing for respondent No.5 and Sri P. Chaitanya, learned counsel for the petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2024.

3. Sri K. Ujjawal Babu, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the writ petitioner, submitted that the petitioner was granted building permission by the respondents for making construction and while he was proceeding with the same, the respondents have issued the impugned notices dated 09.09.2024 and 14.10.2024. Challenging the same, this present Writ Petition has been filed.

4. On 28.10.2024, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5 submitted that the petitioner has been granted building permission for construction of ground + two floors building, whereas the petitioner has constructed a third floor without permission. In view of the same, this Court had directed the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the third floor and to seal the unauthorized construction in the third floor and further directed that the petitioner shall not use the same until further orders.

5. I.A.No.2 of 2024 is filed seeking permission to implead the petitioners in the application as party respondents No.6 & 7 in W.P.No.29276 of 2024 as well as the IAs. The petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2024 submitted that they are the owners of the agricultural land in Sy.No.890/AA and that the writ petitioner has illegally occupied the said land and is making construction thereon. It is further submitted that the petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2024 have made several representations to the authorities not to grant any building permission in the said land. However, without considering the same, the building permission was granted to the writ petitioner and therefore, they are proper and necessary parties to be impleaded in this Writ Petition.

6. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner, however, opposed the impleadment of the petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2024 as party respondents No.6 & 7 in W.P.No.29276 of 2024.

7. Having regard to the rival contentions and in view of the fact that the representations made by the petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2024 before the authorities, which are placed at Page 28 to 34 of the material papers in I.A.No.2 of 2024, are prior to the grant of building permission to the writ petitioner, the official respondents ought to have considered their objections before granting such permission. Therefore, this Court is satisfied that the petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2024 are proper and necessary parties to this Writ Petition.

Accordingly, I.A.No.2 of 2024 is allowed.

8. Since the building permission has already been granted and there is a provision of appeal against the same before the District Collector, the impleaded respondents No.6 & 7 i.e., the petitioners in I.A.No.2 of 2024, are permitted to file appeals before the District Collector. On filing of such appeals, the District Collector shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law, after giving