IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY DATED: 22.01.2026 Between:

M/s Sri Vinayaka Sai Constructions and Developers, Rep. by its Partner Md.Shafi. …Petitioner AND The Kamareddy Municipal Council, Rep. by its Commissioner, Kamareddy Town and District. …Respondent

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of respondent in trying to demolish the building bearing H.No.5-4-2, Ward No.5, Block No.4, admeasuring 696.48 Square yards in Plot No.8/1B, NizamSagar ‘X’ Road, Kamareddy Town (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject property’), without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable and for consequential relief.

2. Heard Sri P.Vishnuvardhan Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent- GHMC.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner herein is a registered firm engaged in real estate business and as part of its business, it has purchased the subject property under registered sale deed No.5499 of 2015, dated 19.06.2015; that the petitioner demolished the existing structure and applied for permission for construction of building and respondent Corporation accorded permission for construction of Stilt + 3 upper floorsvide Permit No.G1/3071/BA/2949/W33, dated 10.09.2018; that the petitioner obtained loan from Telangana Grameena Bank, Kamareddy Branch and completed the construction in the month of March, 2019, as per the sanctioned plan; that the respondent Corporation also raised tax demand notice for Rs.1,10,351/- for the period 2019- 20 and the same was also paid by the petitioner. While the matter stood thus, on 21.07.2019, the officials of respondent-Corporation came to the subject property and demolished bathrooms and some walls of the building and when the tenants of the building tried to stop them, respondent-Corporation informed that they have issued notice to the petitioner on 01.12.2018, notifying certain deviations/irregularities contrary to the sanctioned plan.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that notice was never served on the petitioner firm and respondent-

Corporation and without issuing notice and without following due process of law, the respondent-Corporation is trying to demolish the subject property; that petitioner submitted explanation on 22.07.2019, denying the allegations made in the notice with regard to deviations and the respondent-Corporation has not passed any Order under the provisions of Municipal Law, for demolition of building and respondent-Corporation has acted high-handedly contrary to the procedure contemplated under law and thus, prayed to allow the writ petition.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent by referring to the counter would submit that notice dated 01.12.2018, informing the deviations in the construction has been served on the petitioner and the same was received by one Sri Rajaiah (Watchman). He further submitted that this Court vide Order dated 26.07.2019 in I.A.No.1 of 2019, directed the respondent Corporation not to take up further demolition of subject property, subject to petitioner closing the cellar and not utilizing the floors constructed above stilt + 2 upper floors and further directed that Cellar and floors constructed above stilt + 2 upper floors shall be under the lock and key of the respondent Corporation and the petitioner was permitted to use only the permitted area; that in compliance of Order dated 26.07.2019, passed by this Court, respondent Corporation seized the Cellar and unauthorized upper floors under cover of panchanama dated 26.10.2019. However, the petitioner, in violation of the Orders passed by this Court, had broke open the lock and using the same and the photographs to that effect are placed on recored; that on the compliant made by the respondent Corporation, on 07.01.2022, Police have registered a case against the petitioner in Cr.No.41