2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 56127
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
Chinthala Rishika Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 11583/2025
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11583 OF 2025
ORDER
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not demolishing the road blockage/compound wall in Survey No.65 situated at Ranga Rangaiah Colony, Chengicherla Village, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, as being illegal and unconstitutional.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and
3, and perused the material available on record.
3. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of Plot No.7, admeasuring 460 sq. yards, and Plot No.8, admeasuring 300 sq. yards, in Survey No.64 of Chengicherla Village, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, having purchased the same under two registered sale deeds bearing document No.11493 of 2022 dated 28.11.2022 and document No.7768 of 2022 dated 10.08.2022, respectively. It is stated that since the date of purchase, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property. While so, on noticing that the owner of adjacent land in Survey No.65 made encroachment on the access road of the petitioner’s property, the petitioner gave representations dated 07.03.2024 and 21.06.2024. Based on such complaint, show cause notice dated 12.12.2024 was issued, but thereafter no action has been taken.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that on complaint of the petitioner, inspection of the site was done and it was observed that one Sri R. Gopinath has constructed G+3 floors building by encroaching two designated roads; show-cause notice was issued to him and subsequently orders were passed directing him to remove the encroachments within 15 days. As the said Gopinath has not complied with the order, compound wall that was encroaching one of the roads was removed, but the clearance of the second encroachment on the other road could not be undertaken as the building’s sewerage drainage pipeline is currently clamped to the remaining compound wall. Respondent No.2 issued instructions to the said Gopinath to make necessary arrangements for an alternate sewerage line, and upon completion of alternate sewerage line, the remaining encroachment will also be removed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that unless the second encroachment by way of compound wall on the other road is also removed, it will be difficult for the petitioner to have access to her Plot Nos.7 and 8 in Survey No.64 of Chengicherla Village, and as of now, access to the petitioner’s Plots is completely blocked.
6. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to forthwith remove the second compound wall that was constructed by encroaching the road leading to the petitioner’s plots, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed.
____________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J
Date: 17-04-2025
v v