SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 58854

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
Samudrala Bharathi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 39355/2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

WRIT PETITION No.39355 OF 2025

DATE: 23-12-2025

Between:

Samudrala Bharathi .. Petitioner

AND

The State of Telangana,

Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

Municipal Administration and Urban

Development Department,

Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad,

and three others. .. Respondents

ORDER: (ORAL)

This writ petition is filed to declare notice No.10880/W.No.114/

CIR-23/KZ/GHMC/2025 dated 05.12.2025 issued by respondent No.3

- Deputy Commissioner, Circle-23, Moosapet, under Section 461A of

the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short

‘GHMC Act’), to seal the unauthorized construction made by the

petitioner in her plot admeasuring 98.66 square yards situated at

KPHB Colony Ph-VII, Kukatpally, Moosapet Circle 23, Medchal-

Malkajgir District, without giving an opportunity to prefer the statutory

appeal as mandated under Section 461-A (2) (3) of the GHMC Act, as

being arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the

Constitution of India.

##PAGE2##

::2::

2. Heard Mr. Dr. J. Viplav Babu, learned counsel for the

petitioner, and Mr. K. Ravi Mahender, learned Standing Counsel for

GHMC, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4, and perused the

material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that building

permission was granted to the petitioner for construction of stilt for

parking+2 upper floors vide permit No.323742/8785/GHMC/2023

dated 05.09.2023, as against that the petitioner constructed stilt+5

upper floors. One person of her locality by name Mr. P. Abilash

Reddy, having political clout, had been harassing the petitioner and

also he had been extorting money from several people of their

Colony. At his instance, the GHMC authorities issued the impugned

notice. Later, the petitioner came to know that show-cause notice

dated 14.07.2025 was issued and subsequently the speaking order

(demolition order) dated 31.07.2025 was passed. It is submitted that

the show-cause notice and the speaking order are not served on the

petitioner.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4

produced written instructions along with building permit order dated

05.09.2023, show-cause notice dated 14.07.2025, speaking order

dated 31.07.2025 and also the photographs of the under construction

building of the petitioner.

##PAGE3##

::3::

5. It appears, the show-cause notice dated 14.07.2025 was

issued to the petitioner directing her to explain as to why unauthorized

construction (deviations made to the sanctioned plan) shall not be

removed. Thereafter, the speaking order dated 31.07.2025 was

passed.

6. Learned Standing Counsel for GHMC submitted that the

watchman of the petitioner has received the show-cause notice and

his mobile number was also noted on the show-cause notice.

However, there was no response from the petitioner and the speaking

order dated 31.07.2025 was passed.

7. In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant any

relief to the petitioner as admittedly 3rd, 4th and 5th floors are

unauthorisedly constructed by the petitioner in the subject property.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if

necessary, revised plan or regularization application will be submitted

by the petitioner under Section 455A/455AA of the GHMC Act.

Further, the petitioner is also taking steps to file statutory appeal

under Section 461-A (2) and (3) of the GHMC Act.

##PAGE4##

::4::

9. However, as it is stated that the show-cause notice and the

speaking order are not served on the petitioner and, at the same time,

the petitioner is taking steps to prefer statutory appeal under Section

461-A (2) and (2) of the GHMC Act, the impugned notice dated

05.12.2025 is kept in abeyance for a period of one month.

Status quo, obtaining as on today, shall be maintained in respect of

the subject property for a period of one month from today. Within this

time, the petitioner shall take necessary steps for filing the revised

plan/building regularization application/appeal as provi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top