THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.32596 of 2025

ORDER:

Petitioner seeks a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent Nos.2 and 4 in attempting to demolish part of the petitioner’s property under the guise of National highway widening, without prior notice or compensation, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300A of the Constitution of India, and directing the respondents not to demolish any portion of the petitioner’s premises bearing Municipal Nos.31/1–31/5, Sy.No.627, Yellareddy, Kamareddy District, without following due process of law.

2. Heard Mr.Vijay B.Paropkari, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings for respondent No.5. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the owner of land in Survey No.627 at Yellareddy, Kamareddy District, obtained conversion permission under the NALA Act in 2010 and building permission from the Gram Panchayat in 2011 to construct a ground plus two-floor building, which has existed lawfully for over 13 years. The ground floor houses are commercial establishments while the upper floors serve as the petitioner’s residence. Authorities now propose to widen the highway to 100 feet, alleging that a small balcony encroaches on the road margin. It is stated that no notice or acquisition proceedings were initiated and that any demolition without due process or compensation is illegal. When officials attempted to demolish the balcony on 24.10.2025 without notice, locals resisted. Hence, this Writ Petition.

4. Learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings submits that the petitioner’s property along NH-765D (Medak– Yellareddy Road) was inspected and found to encroach 4–6 feet into the 100-foot Right of Way (ROW), with the building located 44 to 47 feet from the road center. It is stated that no notice or possession has been taken, and no violation of rights has occurred. Further, it is stated that compensation for land or structures will be provided only when land acquisition for the road is undertaken under the National Highways Act, 1956. However, the petitioner’s property falls within the 100-foot ROW on the left-hand side of NH-765D at Medak–Yellareddy, which constitutes encroachment. Consequently, compensation under the National Highways Act, 1956 is not applicable for structures located within the ROW. The Authorities are following due procedure for eviction through the Revenue Authorities, and contends that the petitioner’s allegations are false, praying that the writ petition be dismissed as devoid of merit.

5. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that petitioner is lawful owner of the property in question, constructed with valid conversion and building permissions, and has existed for over 13 years. The respondents have proposed demolition of a part of the property, claiming encroachment into the 100-foot Right of Way (ROW) of NH-765D. It is noted that no notice or due process was provided to the petitioner before attempting demolition. While the respondents have a legitimate interest in maintaining the ROW, any action affecting private property must comply with the principles of natural justice and statutory procedure. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the attempted demolition of the petitioner’s property without notice or due process is premature and cannot be sustained.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.2 to 4 not to demolish or remove any portion of the petitioner’s property without providing prior notice and to follow the procedure under the National Highways Act, 1956, before taking any action. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J Date: 29.10.2025 dgr