IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO I.A.No.1 of 2026 in/and W.P.No.26997 of 2016

09^th FEBRUARY, 2026 Between:

Nehru Lal, S/o.Late Balram, aged about 70 years, Occ: Business, R/o.14-9-824, Jumerath Bazar, Hyderabad.

...Petitioner and The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 2 others ...Respondents

COMMON ORDER

The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“...to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No.2 to 3 in failing to consider the notice/representation of the petitioner Dt.13-06-2016 for grant of compensation along with benefits for the acquisition of the land admeasuring 118 sq. yards under road widening programme situated at 3-5-1133 to 1336/1 at Kachiguda Cross Road, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents No.2 and 3 to forthwith consider the representation of the petitioner dated 13-06-2016 for grant of compensation...”

W.P.No.26997 of 2016

2. Heard Ms.J.Suchitha, learned counsel representing Mr.Sreenivas Rao Velivela, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Mr.G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is the absolute owner of property bearing Nos.3-5-1133 to 3-5-1136/1 at Kachiguda Cross Roads, Hyderabad, having purchased the said property through a registered document bearing No.1811/1951 dt.13.10.1951 and is earning income from the mulgies situated on the said property.

4. It is further contended that in the year, 2000, respondent Nos.2 and 3 took 64 sq. yards of the petitioner’s land including structures for road widening, without issuing any notification or paying any compensation and the remaining 54 sq. yards was also taken by the respondents later, without any notification, resulting in the entire extent of 118 sq. yards being taken over.

5. It is further contended that the petitioner earlier filed W.P.No.24742 of 2000 regarding the acquisition of 64 sq. yards, which was dismissed for W.P.No.26997 of 2016 non-prosecution on 11-07-2008, which the petitioner was unaware of. Later, the petitioner issued a legal notice dated 13-06-2016 requesting for payment of compensation for the entire land acquired. Despite the notice being served, the respondents failed to take any action or pay compensation.

6. Therefore, prayed for a direction from this Court to the respondents to consider the legal notice dated 13.06.2016 and grant compensation with benefits for the land acquired for road widening.

7. On the other hand, Mr.G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3, placing reliance on the counter-affidavit filed, contended that the petitioner herein has filed W.P.No.24742/2000 and the same was dismissed on 11-07-2008, with the following order:

"When the matter has been taken up for hearing on 20-06-2008, none appeared for the petitioner and as such, the matter was directed to be posted under the caption "for dismissal". Today also, when the matter is taken up for hearing, neither learned counsel for the petitioner is present nor is there any representation on his behalf.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

However, the interim orders granted on 13-12-2002 and 29-03-2004 stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs".

8. It is further contended that the respondent-Corporation has taken up road widening at Kachiguda Cross Road to accommodate space for Metro W.P.No.26997 of 2016 Rail Project in the interest of the public at large, and also to reduce the traffic congestion on this road, and sent the requisition to the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, HMR