Administrative orders cancelling regularization proceedings are unsustainable if passed without serving a mandatory show cause notice, especially when such notice was specifically directed by a court to ensure the principles of natural justice.

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the cancellation proceedings regularizing the unapproved layout of land vide LRS proceedings No.9308/TPS/HO/GHMC/2009, dated 08.04.2010 by the respondents, as illegal, arbitrary and for consequential relief.”

2. Heard Sri Vivek Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K. Ravi Mahender, learned Standing counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5. This writ petition is withdrawn against respondent No.6 vide memo dated 23.02.2026. Despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.7.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioner No.1 is the owner of plot No.10 admeasuring 150 square yards vide registered sale deed bearing document No.4127 of 2008 dated 31.07.2008, petitioner No.2 is the owner of plot No.3 admeasuring 120 square yards vide registered sale deed bearing document No.3939 of 2008 dated 29.07.2008, petitioner No.3 is the owner of plot Nos.7 and 8 (part), admeasuring 202 square yards vide registered sale deed bearing document No.236 of 2009 dated 28.01.2009, petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the joint owners of plot Nos.1 and 2 admeasuring 210 square yards vide registered sale deed bearing document Nos.4129 of 2008 and 4130 of 2008, both dated 31.07.2008 and petitioner No.6 is the owner of plot No.11 admeasuring 145 square yards vide registered sale deed bearing document No.4128 of 2008 dated 31.07.2008, in Sy.Nos.134 part, 135 part, 136 part and 137 part, situated at Kukatpally Village and Municipality, Balanagar Mandal, Rangareddy District.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that original land owners have obtained regularization of layout vide proceedings No.LRS/14331/CR-14/westzone/GHMC/2008 dated 16.11.2009, however, the same was cancelled basing on false complaint given by respondent Nos.7 and 8 vide proceedings No.LRS/9308/TPS/HO/GHMC/2009 dated 26.12.2009; that the same was challenged by the owners i.e., A. Maisaiah, R. Adinarayana, M. Sudarshan Goud vide W.P.No.1391 of 2010 and the said writ petition was allowed vide order dated 01.02.2010, and the cancellation proceedings dated 26.12.2009 are quashed with an observation that the respondents are not precluded from passing appropriate orders afresh, by duly issuing notice and opportunity to the petitioners.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that despite orders of this Court in earlier writ petition i.e., W.P.No.1391 of 2010, to pass appropriate orders afresh by duly issuing notice and affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, the respondents once again passed impugned proceedings cancelling the very same LRS regularization proceedings dated 16.11.2009 vide impugned proceedings dated 08.04.2010 without issuing notice to the petitioners; that though a show cause notice dated 17.03.2010 was referred to in the impugned proceedings dated 08.04.2010, no notice has been served on the petitioners. Therefore, the impugned proceedings are liable to be set aside.

6. Learned Standing counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5, on instructions, would submit that the impugned proceedings indicate that show cause notice dated 17.03.2010 was issued to petitioners before passing the impugned proceedings, however, proof of service of show cause notice dated 17.03.2010 is not available in the records of the respondent corporation. Therefore, prayed to pass appropriate orders.

7. Perusal of the material placed on record would reveal that the