IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD DATE: 18.03.2026 Between:

Ibrahim Jaleel …Petitioner AND Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner, Hyderabad Having office at Tank bund Road Hyderabad and another …Respondents

ORDER:

Heard Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Raparthi Venkatesh, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing for the respondents.

2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief:

“….to pass an order, direction or a writ particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents in issuing the demolition order vide Order No.G-125/UC/CIR- 06/SZ/GHMC/2013, dated 14.5.2013 to demolish the petitioner’s House bearing 8-5-2/2/110/P, Maillardevpally Village, GHMC, Rajendranagar Circle, Ranga Reddy District, A.P., as illegal, arbitrary, nebulous, a result of non application of mind, ex facie illegal, in violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of provisions of HMC Act. Consequently, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to extend the benefit of BPS scheme to the petitioner and to Regularise the construction of the petitioner’s House bearing property bearing No.8-5-2/2/110/P, Maillardevpally Village, GHMC, Rajendranagar Circle, Ranga Reddy District, and direct the respondents not to demolish the same and may pass....”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that initially when the matter was posted for hearing on 22.05.2013, this Court granted interim direction vide WP.MP.No.18130 of

2013, which reads as follows:

“There shall be interim direction to the respondents not to demolish the house bearing H.No.8-5-2/2/110/P, Maillardevpally Village, GHMC, Rajendranagar Circle, Ranga Reddy District except issuing notices under Sections 451 and 636 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. However, this order will not preclude the respondents to take appropriate action after issuing notices to the petitioner in accordance with law.”

4. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to follow due procedure of law as envisaged under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, if they intend to take any action, in respect of the subject property by issuing notice to the petitioner, and affording him an opportunity of personal hearing, passing a reasoned order and communicating the same to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any are pending, shall stand closed.

_________________________________ SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, J