HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.35563 OF 2025 ORDER : (ORAL)

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of respondents No.4 and 5 in not considering his representations dated 06.11.2025 and 07.11.2025 as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

2. Heard Mr. V.T.Kalyan, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. V.Narsimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel for HMDA, appearing for respondent No.4; Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5; and perused the material on record.

3. Learned Standing Counsel for HMDA and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5 take preliminary objection to the maintainability of this writ petition. It is submitted that the petitioner does not have any beneficial interest over the subject property in Survey No.675, situated at Kistapur Village, Medchal Mandal, Medchal- Malkajgiri District. The petitioner claims that he is the owner of the subject property on the strength of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 22.03.2024 allegedly executed by respondent No.7. Merely because the petitioner has submitted representation/complaint challenging unauthorized layout will not give him a cause of action to challenge the layout issued in favour of respondent No.7. Further, it is stated that draft layout was granted by the HMDA to respondent No.7 vide proceedings dated 19.07.2021 and no final layout has been released. The layout is still under development and internal roads, parks, open spaces and other amenities are yet to be formed and handed over. The HMDA will strictly ensure that without physical formation of roads, parks, open spaces and other amenities, the final layout will not be released. On receipt of the representation of the petitioner dated 06.11.2025, the site of respondent No.7 was inspected. During the inspection, no encroachments were found on the area earmarked for park and no permanent or temporary structures were noticed in the open space/park/road portions. The ground position is fully in conformity with the draft layout. Learned Standing Counsel further submitted that there is no violation or deviation made by respondent No.7 to the tentative layout as of now.

4. The case of the petitioner is that he along with two (2) others namely Mr. B.Pattabhi Reddy and Mr. G.Krishna Reddy entered into MOU dated 22.03.2024 with respondent No.7 for development of plots in Survey No.675, situated at Kistapur Village, Medchal Mandal, Medchal- Malkajgiri District. The developer of respondent No.7 submitted a layout vide application No.047354/MED/LT/U6/HMDA/19072021 dated 19.07.2021 with respondent No.4 and draft permission was granted on 23.04.2024 with certain conditions. The developer has not complied with the conditions when forming the approach road. Further, the developer has sold the land to the unofficial respondents contrary to the permission. In that connection, several representations were submitted to take action against the developer of respondent No.7 on fraudulent deviations made to the draft layout. The developer has not only deviated from the layout but also sold the land and open spaces to the third parties by misrepresenting the authorities. Hence, action has to be taken against the developer of respondent No.7.

5. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner does not have any locus standi to institute the writ petition. Admittedly, the petitioner has limited interest over the subject property under the MOU dated 22.03.2024. It is not the case of the petitioner that the MOU is crystallized into a sale deed. Moreover, the document is not registered. It is not stated whether property covered under the MOU is the same property being developed by the developer of respondent No.7 under the sanctioned layout. Further, in the representations dated 06.11.2025 and 07.11.2025, vague allegations are made by the petitioner that 40 feet approach road is altered, there is encroachment of park and amenities area a