##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

WRIT PETITION NOs. 4941 OF 2014, 27628 OF 2021 &

18810 OF 2023 DATE: 25.03.2026

W.P.No.4941 of 2014:

Between:

Smt. Singi Reddy Laxmi, D/o.Late Sri Akula Janga Reddy, r/o.Plot No.26, Krishna Reddy Colony, New Bowenpally,

Secunderabad.

…. Petitioner and

The Commissioner, Nagar Panchayat, Pedda Amberpet, Hayathnagar Mandal, R.R. District.

…. Respondents

COMMON ORDER:

Heard Mr. G.Raghupathi Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner

in all the writ petitions, Mr. Singireddy Ravinder Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Peddda Amberpet Municipality and Mr. V.Siddhartha Goud representing Mr. V.Narasimha Goud, learned

Standing Counsel for HMDA in all the writ petitions.

2. The present writ petitions have been filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent authorities in not conducting an enquiry pursuant to the representations of the petitioner, dated 12.02.2014, 27.09.2021, 04.10.2021, and 09.05.2023, and not taking action against

2

the illegally and unauthorized constructions being made in the agricultural lands bearing Sy.No.120 admeasuring Ac.5.15 gts, Sy.No.121 admeasuring Ac.5.02 gts; Sy.No.122 admeasuring Ac.2.04 gts, Sy.No.123 admeasuring Ac.1.31 gts, Sy.No.124/1 admeasuring Ac.0.22 gts, Sy.No.124/2 admeasuring Ac.0.02 gts, Sy.No.125 admeasuring Ac.1.16 gts, Sy.No.126 admeasuring Ac.0.38 gts, Sy.No.127 admeasuring Ac.1.13 gts, Sy.No139 admeasuring Ac.15.08 gts, Sy.No.140 admeasuring Ac.12.07 gts, Sy.No.141 admeasuring Ac.7.22 gts, Sy.No.155 admeasuring Ac.13.37 gts, Sy.No.156 admeasuring Ac.6.13 gts, and Sy.No.157 admeasuring Ac.20.08 gts, situated at Kuntloor Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal (previously Hayathnagar Mandal), Ranga Reddy District, since 2015 onwards to till to date etc., as illegal, arbitrary, bias, violation of the principles of natural justice, fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14 , 21, 300-A etc. of the Constitution of India, and the Municipal Laws and consequently, to direct the officials respondents to conduct a proper enquiry and to demolish the illegal constructions raised in the said lands and further not to

sanction any layout permission in the said land.

3

3. When the matters are taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the suit in O.S.No.383 of 2013 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar, has been filed for partition and separate possession, and

inter se the same is pending adjudication, between the parties, namely, petitioner & two others and the unofficial respondent Nos.12 to 20 in W.P.No.18810 of 2023. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, in the said, I.A.Nos.1132 and 1133 of 2013 were filed seeking grant of temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, and the interim orders were obtained restraining the respondents/defendants therein from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners/plaintiffs therein, and that as on today, the said injunction orders are still

subsisting.

4. It is stated that during the pendency of the suit, the unofficial respondents, taking undue advantage of the situation, are raising illegal constructions in the subject property. However, it is stated that for execution of the said orders in I.A.Nos.1132 and 1133 of 2013, the petitioners/plaintiffs have already moved an application for police

4

aid, despite the same, the unofficial respondents continue to proceed

with the constructions.

5. Initially, when the matter was taken up for hearing before this Court in W.P.No.18810 of 2023 on 19.07.2023, this Court, while

issuing notice to the respondents, has observed as under: “In the meanwhile, respondent authorities are directed

to verify and report whether any illegal construction is being made as alleged by the petitioner, on the next date

of hearing.”

6. It is stated that despit