IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDEABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.10418 of 2019 DATE : 12.03.2026 Between Shisaan Hospitality (Palamuru Grill), Rep. by its Managing Director …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking following relief: “To declare the action of the respondent No.4 in sealing the property i.e., “Palamuru Grill” in premises bearing municipal No.8-2-293/82/A/70/401, plot No.1, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad on 13.05.2019, in pursuant to notice bearing No.70-1/TPS/CIR-18/GHMC/2019, dated 29.04.2019, without verifying the documents submitted along with representations dated 18.03.2019, as illegal, arbitrary and for consequential relief.”

2. Heard Sri Mohd. Islamuddin Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner had entered into a lease deed dated 15.12.2018 with the owners of building bearing H.No.8-2-293/82/A/70/401, road No.1, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad and running a Bar and Restaurant in the name and style of Palamuru Grill by duly obtaining permissions and licenses from the concerned authorities. While so, respondent No.4 had issued notice dated 12.03.2019 to the petitioner to produce certain documents i.e., Trade License (permanent and valid), Food License (permanent and valid), Building Occupancy Certificate along with approved sanctioned plan, Parking plan clearly mentioning place, capacity and distance from the location, Fire NOC; that the petitioner vide letter dated 18.03.2019 submitted all the documents as sought for. However, respondent No.4 has issued another notice dated 29.04.2019 stating that the petitioner though submitted Trade License (permanent and valid), Food License (permanent and valid), Building Occupancy Certificate along with approved sanctioned plan and Fire NOC, has failed to submit Parking plan clearly mentioning place, capacity and distance from the location and Permission plan of shed over the permitted floors and subsequently, sealed the premises on 13.05.2019. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that this Court vide order dated 22.05.2019, has passed interim order directing respondent No.4 to remove the seal of the subject premises, and accordingly, premises was de-sealed and the petitioner at present is operating commercial establishment without any interference from the respondents, and therefore, prayed to dispose of the writ petition in terms of the interim order.

5. Learned Standing counsel for GHMC, by referring to the counter, would submit that the petitioner has submitted only part of the documents as sought for by the respondent No.4 vide notice dated 12.03.2019, therefore, respondent No.4 has issued another notice dated 29.04.2019, informing the petitioner once again to produce two documents; that the petitioner did not produce the same, and as such, the premises was sealed on 13.05.2019; that in view of interim order dated 22.05.2019, the premises was de-sealed. He further submitted that even today, petitioner has failed to comply with the notice dated 29.04.2019 by submitting the parking plan clearly mentioning place, capacity and distance from the location and permission plan of shed over the permitted floors. Therefore, prayed to pass appropriate orders.

6. Perusal of the record would disclose that petitioner has submitted all the documents as sought for by the respondents vide notice dated 12.03.2019 except parking plan clearly mentioning place, capacity and distance from the location and permission plan of shed over the permitted floors despite issuing second notice dated 29.04.2019. Therefore, this Court is of considered opinion that t