THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.14161 of 2015

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in not taking any action to demolish the unauthorized construction made by the 4^th respondent in premises bearing No.10-3-281/1/D to H, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as subject property), in violation of sanctioned plan, as illegal, arbitrary and for consequential relief.

2. Heard Sri K.S.Suneel, learned counsel representing Sri B.Chandrasen Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners on record, Sri M.Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri M.A.K.Mukeed, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

3. Learned Counsel for petitioners would submit that petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors of house bearing No.10-3-281/1/A, 10-3-281/B, 10-3-281/1/101 and 10-3-281/1/201, situated at Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad, having acquired the same under registered sale deed Nos.984 of

1996, dated 26.06.1996, 1396 of 1998, dated 31.07.1998 and 1128 of 2014, dated 12.03.2014. The respondent No.4 who is the neighbor of petitioners and owner of the subject property has obtained permission for construction of building vide permit No.37506/DC/CZ/Cir-7/2014, dated 29.10.2014. However, contrary to the sanctioned plan, respondent No.4 was constructing the building without leaving setbacks and making provision for windows and ventilators towards petitioners’ house, due to which the air and light being enjoyed by the petitioners is affected; that petitioners made a representation dated 30.04.2015 to respondent Nos. 1 to 3, against the illegal construction of respondent No.4, but no action has been taken by the respondents. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that subsequent to filing of the writ petition, respondent No.4 has filed an application for regularization of the construction in terms of G.O.Ms.No.152 MA dated 02.11.2015 vide application No.2000044797, dated 29.12.2015 and the same is pending. He further submitted that as and when the BRS application of respondent No.4 is disposed of, the respondents-Corporation will take further course of action basing on the outcome of the BRS application of respondent No.4.

5. This Court has given its earnest consideration to the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and perused the entire material on record.

6. It is relevant to note that the Government of Telangana has formulated Rules for regularization of unauthorized/illegal constructions, which are constructed in deviation of sanctioned plan or without permission, vide GO.Ms.No.152, dated 02.11.2015. As per the said G.O., the application for regularization of unauthorized construction has to be submitted within a period of 60 days from the date of notification of the said Rules along with 50% of regularization amount as per Rule 5 or minimum of Rs.10,000/- whichever is less. The competent authority, i.e., Municipal Commissioner in case of Municipal Corporations, Metropolitan Commissioner in case of HMDA, shall, on scrutiny of applications and inspection of sites, either approve or reject the applications and communicate the same to the applicant(s) concerned as early as possible, but not beyond six months from the date of receipt of applications.

7. The Regularization Rules were notified on 02.11.2015, as per which, applications for regularization were to be filed within 60 days from the said notified date and the same were supposed to be processed within a period of six months from the last date of receipt of applications

8. The regularization scheme under GO.Ms.No.152, dated 02.11.2015 was challenged in WP (PIL).No.63 of 2016, wherein interim directions were passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 18.10.2016 as under:-

“We consider it appropriate, in such circumstances, to modify the earlier order, and direct that the applications for regular