IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.28978, 27013, 27292, 27453, 30977, 32764, 37107 and 37177 OF 2025 DATE OF ORDER: 10.12.2025 Between:

Mukund Das Soni and others …Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

…Respondents COMMON ORDER : (ORAL)

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

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. G.Madhusudan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC); and perused the material on record.

3. Learned Standing Counsel for GHMC, basing on the written instructions, submitted that as many as twenty (20) complaints have been received from Mr. Mukund Das Soni (petitioner No.1 in all the writ petitions) alleging unauthorized constructions are being made in the land in Survey Nos.44/5/1 and 44/5/2, Maqta Mahaboobpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, without obtaining requisite building permissions. In the complaints, it was claimed that Mr. Mukund Das Soni is the absolute owner and possessor of the land in the above survey numbers and certain individuals, who have grabbed his land, have made construction using fraudulent documents. It is submitted that on receipt of such complaints, the staff of the GHMC inspected all the constructions and it was observed that the complaints pertain to different categories of properties including ongoing constructions, completed and occupied buildings, commercial shops and long-standing sheds. It was noticed that few of the locations mentioned in the complaints do not fall within the above survey numbers as referred to by the complainant. That for the purpose of verifying whether the constructions are authorized, notices have been issued to all the concerned owners/occupiers under Section 635 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘GHMC Act’). Most of the owners/occupiers have responded to the said notices and have submitted written replies stating that the complainant is repeatedly filing false and fraudulent complaints with an intention to harass, blackmail and extort money. Some of the owners of the buildings, which had already been constructed, stated that they are in occupation of the buildings since many years and there is no ongoing construction activity in their properties.

4. W.P. No.28978 of 2025:

Learned Standing Counsel for GHMC submitted that the respondents No.6 and 7 herein are no way concerned with the land in the above survey numbers. One Mr. Dakshina Murthy is the actual owner of the land. Upon confirmation that the construction is being carried out in the land without any valid permission, show cause notice was issued. Thereafter speaking order was passed and later, sealing notice under Section 461-A of the GHMC Act.

5. W.P. No.27013 of 2025:

Learned Standing Counsel submitted that notice was issued to respondent No.6 herein calling upon him to submit relevant documents in respect of the subject land; he submitted reply stating that there is no ongoing construction at the site and he purchased the land on 18.06.1997 after the building was constructed and he is in physical possession and enjoyment of the land. That the vendor of respondent No.6 herein obtained building permission vide building permit No.1241/MP2/HUDA/95 dated 23.09.1996 and Group Housing permission vide file No.G/146/LP/148/96 dated 01.03.1996 and the same were submitted along with the reply. Upon verification of the same, it was observed that the layout copy submitted by respondent No.6 herein was only a draft layout and not an approved layout and that certain modifications were made to the existing construction, as such, show cause notice was issued to him for the said deviations. Subsequently, the complainant (Mr.