THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition Nos.5357, 16252, 16875, 18780, 18781 and 20587 of 2023 and

4175, 4222, 4230, 4277, 4326, 4342, 6801, 6841, 6967, 7014, 7065, 7070, 7083, 7090, 7099, 7101, 7107, 7111, 7121, 7122, 7126, 7148 & 7581 of 2024

COMMON ORDER

Since the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Heard learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the petitioners in all these Writ Petitions; learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development; learned Standing Counsel appearing for Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority; learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation; Sri Abhay Kumar Sagar, learned Standing Counsel for Municipality; Sri K.Raghuveer Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5 in W.P.Nos.5357 and 20587 of 2023; Sri Koda Satyanarayana Rao learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and Sri M.Dhananjay Reddy, learned counsel appearing for on behalf of respondent No.5 in W.P.No.4222 of 2024; and Sri K.Ramchandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the unofficial respondent in W.P.Nos.6967 and 7070 of 2024 and perused the record.

2A. Though notice is ordered to the unofficial respondents in this batch of Writ Petitions some of the notices are returned unserved. However, in view of the manner of disposal and the nature of lis involved, this Court is of the view that the matters can be disposed of without having the audience of the said respondents.

3. For ease of reference, the facts as stated in W.P.No.4222 of 2024 are taken as basis for disposal of all these Writ Petitions.

4. This batch of Writ Petitions are filed by the Union of India assailing the action of the respondents-Municipal Corporation in not initiating appropriate action against the constructions being made by the unofficial respondents without obtaining No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the defence authorities in the land adjacent to such defence establishments.

5. It is the contention of the petitioners that originally G.O.Ms.No.168 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (M) Department dt.07.04.2012 provided for obtaining NOC from the concerned defence authorities mandatory, while applying and obtaining building permission from the concerned municipal authorities; that the said condition has been deleted/amended by the respondent-authorities under G.O.Ms.No.7 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (M1) Department dt.05.01.2016 without the consent or concurrence of the concerned defence authorities; that removal of condition of requirement of obtaining NOC from the concerned defence authorities is contrary to the Guidelines dt.18.05.2011 issued by the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, New Delhi; and that allowing such constructions immediately adjacent to the defence establishments, is contrary to the provisions of the Works of Defence Act, 1903 (for short, ‘the WODA’).

6. It is the further case of the petitioners that on account of the respondent-municipal authorities granting building permission without insisting on obtaining NOC from the concerned Local Military Authority (LMA)/defence authorities, and the unofficial respondents are undertaking constructions on the basis of such permissions granted by the respondent- authorities in the vicinity of defence establishments without maintaining the minimum distance from the boundary of defence establishments as prescribed Guidelines dt.18.05.2011, call for initiation of action against the said constructions by the respondent-authorities, as the same is contrary to the prescription of requirement to maintain the distance of 100 meters from the boundary wall of defence establishment, thus, in contravention of WODA.

7. It is also contended on behalf of the petitioners that as per Guidelines dt.18.05.2011, NOC is required to be obtained, if any construction is coming up within 100 meters radius of defence