SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 6227

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
D.Srinivas – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 15272/2018



IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION No.15272 OF 2018 DATED: 02.02.2026 Between D. Srinivas and 9 others.

…Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad and 13 others.

…Respondents

O R D E R:

The instant writ petition is filed to declare the inaction on the part of the official respondents in not taking any steps to prevent the respondent No.14 from erecting/installing various statues and consequently to remove the same as they are installed on the road margin of national highway leading from Hyderabad to Warangal at Ramanthapur as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional apart from being contrary to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India made in SLP(C) No.8519/2006 dated 18.01.2013 and the G.O.Ms. No.18, Transport, Roads and Buildings (Road-I) Department dated 18.02.2013 and in gross violation of the provisions of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and consequently direct the official respondents to register cases and prosecute all the persons responsible for erection of such statues at the above said place and remove all such statues already erected forthwith, further to take all possible steps to prevent erection of any statue by any other person at the above said place.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are residents of various colonies situated at Ramanthapur and Habsiguda of Uppal Mandal, Medchal–Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad. The petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors of their respective lands/plots situated in Survey Nos. 43 and 44, abutting the main Hyderabad–Warangal National Highway at Ramanthapur, Uppal Mandal, formerly Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same from their original owners through various registered and distinct sale deeds. While so, during the year 2013, the National Highways Authority of India, along with the Revenue and Municipal Authorities, proposed to widen the main road leading from Hyderabad to Warangal by utilizing portions of the petitioners’ lands/plots, without issuing any notice and without payment of compensation.

3. Aggrieved thereby, some of the petitioners were constrained to approach this Hon’ble Court by filing W.P. No.13769 of 2013, and this Hon’ble Court, by order dated 29.04.2013 in W.P.M.P. No.16852 of 2013, was pleased to grant interim directions restraining the respondents therein from dispossessing the petitioners from their respective properties without following due process of law. However, in blatant disregard of the said interim directions, the road-widening work was partly carried out. Further, the authorities, including the Revenue and Municipal Authorities, assured the petitioners that the proposed widening of the National Highway would be completed only after payment of due compensation to the land/plot owners and while so matters stood thus, on the midnight of 09.04.2018, certain private individuals, acting under the authorization, guidance, and support of the local Member of Legislative Assembly, namely Respondent No.14 herein, suddenly and illegally commenced erection of statues on the said National Highway, without any authority of law and without obtaining any permission from the competent Government authorities.

4. Thereafter, the petitioners alleged to brought the said illegal activity to the notice of the municipal authorities and also made representations to the police on 10.04.2018. Upon receipt of the said complaint, the police arrived at the spot and attempted to restrain the said individuals from installing the statues and called upon them to produce valid permission. At that stage, respondent No.14 intervened and high-handedly asserted that he would proceed with the erection of the statues and further claimed that no permission from any authority was required for the same. Subsequently,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top