HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28317 OF 2023 ORDER : (ORAL)

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief:

‘...to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 in taking action against the Respondent Nos.9 to 12 who in the guise of Building Permission vide Permit No.5703/GHMC/SLP/ 2023BP dated 25/04/2023 granted by the respondent No.3 herein in respect of their Plot Nos.7, 8, 9 and 10 Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, have illegally and highhandedly trespassed into a part of the land in adjacent Sy.No.99 of Kondapur Village Serilingampally Mandal Ranga Reddy District which belongs to the family of the Petitioner and thereby commenced illegal construction thereon as illegal arbitrary and in gross violation of pricniples of natural justice apart from offending Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India besides contrary to the provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act 1955 and the Building Byelaws made therein consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 to forthwith remove all such illegal constructions made by the Respondent Nos.9 to 12 in and over the said property and pass...’

2. Heard Mr. K. Srinivas Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing for respondents No.2 to 6; Mr. Venkateswar Rao, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.9 to 12, and perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the mother of the petitioner Smt. Abbineni Anasuya was the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.16.13 guntas in Sy.No.99 situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having acquired the same under a final decree passed by the learned Court of Munsif Magistrate, Hyderabad West in O.S.No.62 of 1963 dated 12.09.1963. The name of the petitioner’s mother has been reflected in all the revenue records. The mother of the petitioner died intestate on 29.12.2000, leaving behind the petitioner and his three sisters as legal heirs and successors-in-interest, thus they have become absolute owners of the subject property. It is stated that the subject land was part of Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration and declaration was filed under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, (hereinafter called as the “ULC Act”) by the mother of the petitioner and orders were passed under Section 8(4) of the ULC Act, on 05.03.1983 declaring her as surplus owner to an extent of 4,25,823 square meters. The mother of the petitioner filed an appeal vide Appeal No.62 of 1999 before the Appellate Authority under the ULC Act. During the pendency of the Appeal, interim order of status quo was granted on 18.08.1999. After expiry of the mother of the petitioner on 29.12.2000, the petitioner and his three sisters were not brought on record and later notice under Section 10(5) of the ULC Act was issued in the name of the dead person (mother of the petitioner), who expired on 29.12.2000. Subsequently, order under Section 10(6) dated 02.02.2008 was passed again in the name of the deceased mother of the petitioner and possession of the land remaining 4,25,823 square meters was allegedly taken on 11.02.2008 under a panchanama. Subsequently, Government allotted entire surplus land under G.O.Ms.No.978, dated 02.08.2008. W.P No. 18342 of 2008 was filed by the petitioner challenging said G.O.Ms.No.978, dated 02.08.2008, and the said writ petition was disposed of vide orders dated

02.03.2009.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that originally his mother was the owner of the subject property and after her death, the petitioner and his sisters became the owners of the subject property by intestate succession. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents No.9 to 12 have applied for building permissio