IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
JONDULE RUPA HYD AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
PRL SECY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPT. HYD AND 4 OT – Respondent
WP 14105/2015
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION No.14105 of 2015 DATE: 18.02.2026 Between:
Smt. Jondule Rupa and another …Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal administration and Urban Development, Telangana Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others …Respondents
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
“…Issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of Respondent No.2 herein for demoliton of unauthorised and illegal structures got constructed by the Respondent Nos.3 to 5 herein on the land belonging to the petitioners herein in an extent of 2420 square yards equivalent to Ac.0-20 Guntas out of Sy.No.315/1 part with Code No.98 situated at Mancherial Shivaru Village of Mancherial Municipality within the Zilla Parishad area Adilabad Revenue Mandal within the Sub Registration District of Mancherial and Registration District Adilabad and bounded by East- 30 feet Road, West - land of Madasu Shankaraiah, North - Land of Kandugula Rajalingu and others despite representation dated 31-03-
2015 of the petitioner submitted to respondent No.2 herein as unjust, unconstitutional, against procedures of law and against principles of natural justice while consequently directing the respodnents herein to remove/pull down/cause to be removed/pulled down the unauthorised and illegal constructions and structures thereon the said property of the petitioners herein in accordance with law in the interest of justice and to pass.…”
2. Heard Sri A. Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Krishna Reddy Putta, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the record.
3. learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the absolute owners of the subject property i.e. 2420 square yards equivalent to Ac.0-20 Guntas out of Sy.No.315/1 part with Code No.98 situated at Mancherial Shivaru Village of Mancherial Municipality within the Zilla Parishad area Adilabad Revenue Mandal within the Sub Registration District of Mancherial and Registration District Adilabad by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 31-12-2014. He submits that respondent Nos.3 to 5 encroached upon the petitioners’ land and constructed house structures without any building permission or lawful authority. He further submits that despite submitting representation dated 31-03-2015 to the municipal authorities seeking demolition of the unauthorized constructions, no action has been taken so far. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed complaining of inaction on the part of respondent No.2.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 filed a counter affidavit stating that upon receipt of the aforesaid representation, intimation letters were issued to respondent Nos.3 to 5 calling for relevant documents. He submits that upon field verification by the Town Planning staff and examination of municipal records, no unauthorized construction was found in Sy.No.315/1 (part) or Sy.No.324. He submits that the constructions made by respondent Nos. 3 to 5 on the subject property were in accordance with the building permissions obtained from the competent authority. He submits that there are no illegal constructions on the subject property and that the dispute, if any, appears to be civil in nature relating to title or encroachment, for which the petitioners may approach the competent civil court.
5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of both parties and perused the material available on record. The grievance of the petitioners is that unauthorized constructions were raised by respondent Nos.3 to 5 on the subject property and that respondent No.2 failed to take action. However, respondent No.2 has categorically stated in the counter affidavit that upon verification, no unauthorized const
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.