IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION No.20127 OF 2013 Date: 05.12.2025 Between:

Smt. P.Hema and another.

…Petitioners AND Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, Warangal rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Warangal District & another.

…Respondents

O R D E R:

This writ petition is filed seeking to direct respondent No.1 to consider the realignment of the road development plan pursuant to the recommendations of the Deputy City Planner of respondent No.2-Corporation or in the alternative pay compensation to the land of an extent of 189.57 Square Metres of which the petitioners have been deprived and further direct the respondents to take action against the illegal constructions on the road portion as per the realigned road development plan of Kanakadurga colony by taking action against the illegal encroachments into the road portion.

2. Heard Mr. Raja Sripathi Rao Panugoti, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. Uday Kumar Kukkadapu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Ms. Mahee Gone, learned counsel representing Mr. Pasham Mohith, learned Standing Counsel for Warangal Municipal Corporation, appearing for respondent No.2. Perused the material available on record.

3. On 28.11.2025, this Court has directed respondent No.2 to file appropriate instructions as to the action taken in the matter.

4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has placed a copy of written instructions under the signature of respondent No.2, wherein it is stated that initially, the petitioners have obtained building permission, dated 02.12.2021 for the construction of a Stilt + 5 floors residential apartment building by removing the existing house bearing No.2-7- 1165, Hanamkonda and thereafter, the petitioners have filed a revised building application showing the road affected portion of their land and seeking the benefit of setback relaxation for the areas affected for the road widening and in consideration of their building permit was granted and the petitioners have completed their vide construction and obtained the Occupancy Certificate proceedings No.0010/OC/3006/2025, dated 20.02.2025, and that since the petitioners have availed benefits of setback relaxation in lieu of the land stated to be affected in the road widening, he asserts that the petitioners have already been compensated in terms of setback relaxation.

5. At this juncture, learned Senior Counsel submitted that in the written instructions, what is the actual portion of the land, which is being affected in the road widening, is not stated. He further submitted that the petitioners should be adequately compensated for the land taken by respondent No.2.

6. Learned Senior Counsel further contended that though the benefit of relaxation of setbacks has been granted while according building permission, it is not in proportion to the extent of land which has been taken for road widening. He further contended that an appropriate and detailed clarification is required as to how much land of the petitioners was acquired by respondent No.2 for road widening and the entitlement of TDR certificate or any other benefit in terms of G.O.Ms.No.168, dated

07.04.2012.

7. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner, the main grievance of the petitioner is that though set-backs relaxation is granted, it is not in proportion to the land affected by road widening and in such circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the respondents as to their entitlement of proportionate value either for TDR or any other monetary compensation in lieu of the land affected by road widening within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such representation being made, the respondents shall necessarily consider dispose it of within a per