##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

WRIT PETITION No.19854 OF 2014

AND

CONTEMPT CASE No.2426 OF 2016

Date.27.02.2026

W.P.No.19854 of 2014

Between:

Mohammed Zaheeruddin Ahmed and (2) others.

…. Petitioners

And

The District Collector,

Hyderabad and (5) others.

…Respondents

CC.No.2426 of 2016

Between:

Mohammed Zaheeruddin Ahmed and (2) others.

…. Petitioners

And

Mohammed Nazeer and another

…Respondents

:: COMMON ORDER ::

Since the Contempt Case arise for non implementation

of the interim orders passed in the Writ Petition, both the

Contempt Case and the Writ Petition are taken up for

SCR,J

W.P.No.19854 of 2014

and

C.C.No.2426 of 2016

2

hearing together and being disposed of by this common

order.

2. Heard Sri Syed Naimullah Shakeel, learned counsel for

petitioners, both in the Writ Petition as well as in Contempt

Case, and Sri Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel

for GHMC. None appears for unofficial respondent Nos.5

and 6 in the writ petition, who are the respondents in the

contempt case.

3. W.P.No.19854 of 2014 is filed under Article 226 of

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue an appropriate writ or orders more

particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus

directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to take urgent

action in removing the unauthorized and illegal

constructions made on the part of the colony

road by respondent Nos.5 and 6 in Khaderbagh

Colony, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad, and to act as

per the enquiry report in Proc. No.

186/TPS/C7/W13/2013 dated 21.06.2014, and

further direct the respondent No.4 to provide

the necessary Police force to assist the

respondent Nos.2 and 3 in removal of illegal

construction...”

SCR,J

W.P.No.19854 of 2014

and

C.C.No.2426 of 2016

3

4. When the writ petition was initially taken up for

hearing on 30.07.2014, while admitting the writ petition,

this Court passed interim order in W.P.M.P.No.24880 of

2014 by recording the submissions of the Standing Counsel

for the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. The said

non compliance of interim order, is under challenge in the

contempt case, and it reads as under:

“Sri R. Radha Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel

for GHMC, on instructions, would submit that the

subject construction is unauthorized; action has already

been initiated, and a notice under Sections 452 (1) and

461 (1) of the HMC Act, dated 16.04.2014, was issued

was issued; since the petitioner did not submit a reply

thereto, a notice under Section 452(2) of the HMC Act,

dated 22.05.2014, was issued; thereafter, final notice

under Section 636 of the HMC Act, dated 07.06.2014,

was issued; though a program was fixed for demolition of

the illegal construction on 12.06.2014, 16.06.2014 and

30.06.2014, the exercise of demolition could not be

undertaken because of non-availability of the police force;

and, while matters stood thus, one Sri Mir Akther Ali had

filed O.S.No.1126 of 2014 and the civil court granted an

order of status quo.

An order of status quo would require the position, existing

as on the date of the order, to be maintained by either

parties to the proceedings before the Civil Court. The

order of status quo does not enable further construction

to be made by the plaintiffs in the suit. The photographs

placed before this Court show a G+2 storied building

under construction, with the ground and first floor being

covered with outer walls, and the second floor with a slab

but without any outer walls.

SCR,J

W.P.No.19854 of 2014

and

C.C.No.2426 of 2016

4

Pending further orders, respondent Nos.5 and 6 shall not

make any further construction except after obtaining

prior written permission from the GHMC.”

5. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing,

Sri Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for

respondent Nos.2 and 3 contended that a notice dated

16.04.2014 was issued to the owner of the site, however, as

on that date, since already status quo order was passed in

O.S.No.1126 of 2014 by the competent Civil Court, and the

said suit is pending adjudic