THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO W.P.No.34565 of 2013 O R D E R: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Suddala Chalapathi Rao)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pasham Mohith, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents and perused the record.

2. The instant Writ Petition has been filed assailing the action of the respondents in seeking to demolish the compound wall and one RCC room constructed by the petitioner in land admeasuring Acre 0.22 guntas. in survey No.329 of Thimmapur Grampanchayath, Warangal Mandal & District, as illegal, arbitrary, void-ab-initio, violative of due procedure of law and principles of natural justice.

3. The petitioner contends that he is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acre 0.22 guntas in survey No.329 of Thimmapur Grampanchayath, Warangal Mandal & District, having purchased under a registered sale deed, dt.13.07.2005. In order to protect the said land from trespassers and land grabbers, he has constructed a compound wall and RCC room. As the said land is classified as agriculture land and is situated outside the abadi of Grampanchayath, but within the limits of Thimmapur Village, he did not obtain permission for the aforesaid construction made by him.

4. Petitioner further contends that on the application made by him, the Tahsildar, Warangal Mandal, after conducting enquiry, entered his name in the revenue records in possession and pattadar columns in respect of aforementioned property and issued pattadar pass book and title deeds, and since the subject land is classified as agricultural land, the Grampanchayath Thimmapur does not have any jurisdiction over the said land.

5. Petitioner further contends that the 1st respondent issued notice, dt.18.11.2013 calling upon the petitioner to submit explanation, as to why the compound wall and RCC room constructed by the petitioner in survey Nos.328 and 329 should not be demolished as it is constructed without obtaining prior permission from the 1^st respondent as required under Sections 428, 433 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1950(for short ‘the HMC Act’).

6. It is further contended by the petitioner that a detailed explanation, dt.26.11.2013, was submitted to the respondents and without considering the said explanation, the respondents herein are proposing to demolish the subject compound wall and RCC room.

7. Sri Pasham Mohith, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents submits that the RCC room and compound wall constructed by the petitioner are illegal and unauthorized structures, as no prior permission was obtained by the petitioner.

8. In reply thereto, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on the date of said construction, as the subject land was under limits of Gram Panchayat Thimmapur, it does not require permission and as it was subsequently got merged with the Warangal Municipality, the respondents cannot contend the construction made by the petitioner was without obtaining prior permission from the respondents-Municipality, which in fact was not in existence at the relevant point of time.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on 29.11.2013, this Court while observing that the petitioner should not make any further construction, granted interim protection directing the respondents not to demolish the compound and RCC room of the petitioner, and prays this Court to extend the said protection till the respondents-authorities passing orders pursuant to the show-cause notice issued by the 1^st respondent, upon consideration of the explanation submitted by the petitioner. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the impleaded respondent disputed the title and possession of the petitioner over the subject property and claimed that he is the original owner of a portion of the said property and despite giving multiple representations to the 1^st respondent, no action has been taken and thus, sought to dismiss the writ petition.

11. I have taken note