Municipal authorities are statutorily obligated to act against unauthorized constructions following due process after receiving citizen complaints, and courts must not exercise equitable jurisdiction to regularize illegal developments that violate municipal and zoning laws.

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent Nos.5 to 7 in not taking any action against respondent Nos.8 and 9 for making illegal and unauthorized constructions over the house property bearing Municipal Door No.23-2-137/B situated at Moghulpura, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred as “subject property”) having received online complaint vide Ref. ID No.2402265729398, dated 24.02.2026 and through Prajavani vide Ref.No.DHYDE0203260000, dated 02.03.2026 and physical complaint dated 17.03.2006. A consequential prayer is sought to direct respondent Nos.5 to 7 to demolish the illegal structures already constructed besides taking action for seizing the property.

2. The facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition are as follows:

The petitioner claims to be the neighbor of respondent Nos.8 and 9, R/o. H.No.23-2-138 situated at Moghulpura, Hyderabad. It is submitted that one Rasheedullah Khan purchased the subject property by way of a registered sale deed bearing document No.2177/2016 dated 11.04.2026 from its original owner Mohammed Akhil. Subsequently, Rasheedullah Khan applied for building permission and the same was accorded on 12.04.2016 with certain condition and the said permission was accorded for residential purposes only. But in deviation to the sanctioned plan, Rasheedullah Khan started constructions not leaving the mandatory setbacks and made commercial constructions such as mulgies / shops. Initially, the petitioner’s brother filed W.P.No.12854 of 2017 before this Court and this Court granted an interim order dated 12.04.2017 directing the GHMC authorities to ensure that the construction being undertaken by Rasheedullah is not in deviation to the sanctioned plan. Prior to the filing of the writ petition by petitioner’s brother, the petitioner filed O.S.No.599 of 2016 against Rasheedullah and the original owner Mr. Mohammed Akhil seeking pre emption under Mohammadan Law and for cancellation of sale deed. Subsequently, an interim injunction was granted in favor of the petitioner in the year 2016 restraining Rasheedullah Khan from alienating the subject property. The said interim order was extended from time to time. Due to some technical reasons, the interim order was not extended. Taking advantage of the same, the said Rasheedullah Khan sold the subject property to one Ishaquddin by way of a registered sale deed bearing document No.941 of 2023. Thereafter, the petitioner impleaded Ishaquddin in the said suit and when the trial commenced, Ishaquddin sold the subject property to respondent Nos.8 and 9 by way of registered document No.1069 of 2025, dated 02.06.2025. Subsequently, the respondent Nos.8 and 9 were also impleaded by the petitioner in the said suit seeking consequential reliefs. The trial is commenced and is in progress. The respondent Nos.8 and 9 commenced illegal constructions in the last week of February without obtaining fresh permission and are making the said construction on the plan obtained by Rasheedullah Khan in the year 2016, which was obtained long back and is expired. Aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos.8 and 9, the petitioner made representations / complaint on 24.02.2026, 02.03.2026 & 17.03.2026 through various modes. As the representations of the petitioner were not acted upon by the respondent authorities, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner’s representations / complaint are still pending for consideration, the respon