ORDER:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not initiating action against the illegal and unauthorized construction being carried out by respondent No.4 in the property bearing H.No.1-116 & 1-117 (Old No.1-27), admeasuring 300 square yards situated at Himayath Sagar Village, Gandipet Mandal, Rangareddy District (hereinafter referred as “subject property”). A consequential prayer is sought to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to take action in accordance with law including issuance of statutory notice, stoppage of work and demolition of the unauthorized construction.

2. Brief facts of the case as stated that the subject property originally belonged to the petitioner’s maternal grandparents and the same is ancestral in nature. After the demise of petitioner’s mother, disputes arising among the legal heirs, the petitioner along with his siblings filed a suit for partition and separate possession by name O.S.No.509 of 2017 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad seeking division of the subject property. Subsequently, the suit was dismissed in the year 2023. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal by name A.S.No.160 of 2023 on the file of learned XII Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar (hereinafter referred as “trial court”). Subsequently, the trial court passed an order dated 16.02.2024 in I.A.No.679 of 2023 restraining the respondents, their men and persons claiming through or under them from changing the nature of the subject property pending disposal of the appeal. The respondent No.4 is arrayed as respondent No.2 in the said order. Despite the said order, the respondent No.4 commenced illegal construction over the subject property. Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.4, the petitioner made a representation / complaint to respondent No.3 on 09.02.2026 requesting to stop the construction being undertaken by respondent No.4 and to take immediate action as per law. But, no action has been initiated on the said representation. As such, the present writ petition is filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since petitioner’s representation dated 09.02.2026 is still pending for consideration, the respondent authorities may be directed to consider the same and take action in a time bound period.

4. On the other hand, Mr. Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the petitioner’s representation dated 09.02.2026 will be considered, if not already considered, and appropriate action would be initiated, in accordance with law, and prays this Court to pass appropriate orders.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and perused the material made available on the record.

6. Since this Court, time and again, directed the Municipal Authorities to initiate action against the illegal constructions by following due process of law, it is noticed that the authorities are failing to initiate action against the illegal constructions. However, in some of the cases, authorities are issuing statutory notices and thereafter not proceeding further to initiate further course of action unless writ petitions are filed for not considering complaints/representations made to civic authorities.

7. It is not out of place to mention Section 7(6) of the Telangana State Building Permission Approval and Self Certification System (TS- BPASS) Act, 2020 (for short ‘the TS-BPASS Act’) which also encourages citizens to put on notice to the Civic Authorities regarding unauthorized constructions. Section 7(6) of the TS-BASS Act is extracted for reference.

“7. Approval of Building Permissions-
….
(6) Citizens shall be encouraged to bring to the notice of Municipality and District Collector cases where unauthorized construction or construction in violation of or in excess of permissions, in