THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.33951 of 2014

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the final notice dated

01.08.2014 issued by respondent No.3 to demolish the construction of the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to set aside and the same.

2. Heard Ms.Sowmya Sanisetty, learned counsel, representing Sri Venkateswarlu Sanisetty, learned Counsel for the petitioner on record and Sri Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of house property bearing H.No.B-472, Municipal No.6-2-520, LIG Phase-II of Vanasthalipuram Residential Complex, admeasuring 150.19 Sq.yrds in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar Kalan Village, L.B.Nagar Circle, R.R.District, having purchased the same under registered sale deed No.1839 of 2008 dated 07.05.2008. Since the house building was very old, petitioner intended to construct a new building by removing existing old building and commenced constructing Ground + 2 Upper Floors and Pent House. While the matter stood thus, respondent No.3 issued notice under Section 452 of HMC Act, 1955, alleging that petitioner raised structures without any permission; that the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S.No.638 of 2011 on the file of I-Senior Civil Judge, R.R.District and obtained Status-Quo Orders and the said suit was dismissed on 21.03.2014; that petitioner submitted applications on 29.04.2014 and 09.07.2014, before respondent No.2 for regularization of building. In the meanwhile, respondent No.3 issued impugned notice dated 26.06.2014, under Section 636 of GHMC Act, 1955, for demolition of structures raised by the petitioner and also issued final notice dated 01.08.2014. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 by referring to the counter filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 would submit that petitioner has undertaken construction without any permission; that respondents’ Corporation by following due process of law issued notice dated 31.03.2011, under Section 452(1) and 461(1), basing on the complaint submitted by one P.Lakshmi Narayana. Since the petitioner did not give reply to the said notice, respondents’ Corporation issued notice dated 13.04.2011, under Section 452(2) of HMC Act and thereafter, issued final notice dated 21.04.2011, under Section 636 of HMC Act. Subsequently, after filing the writ petition, petitioner has submitted an application for regularization in terms of G.O.Ms.No.152, MA & UD (M1), dated

02.11.2015 vide application reference No.200003176 and the same is pending.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 would further submit that the application filed by the petitioner is pending consideration and once the BRS application is disposed of, the respondents’ Corporation will take further action basing on the outcome of the BRS application of the petitioner.

6. This Court has given its earnest consideration to the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and perused the entire material on record.

7. It is relevant to note that the Government of Telangana has formulated Rules for regularization of unauthorized/illegal constructions, which are constructed in deviation of sanctioned plan or without permission, vide GO.Ms.No.152, dated 02.11.2015. As per the said G.O., the application for regularization of unauthorized construction has to be submitted within a period of 60 days from the date of notification of the said Rules along with 50% of regularization amount as per Rule 5 or minimum of Rs.10,000/- whichever is less. The competent authority, i.e., Municipal Commissioner in case of Municipal Corporations, Metropolitan Commissioner in case of HMDA, shall, on scrutiny of applications and inspection of sites, either approve or reject the applications and communicate the same to the applicant(s) concerned as early as possible, but not beyond six months fr