SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 13072

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
M. Usha – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 10347/2026



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.10347 of 2026

DATE OF ORDER: 07.04.2026 Between:

Ms.M Usha.

…Petitioner AND

The State of Telangana, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department and two others.

…Respondents

ORDER:

Heard Sri.Narendar Jalli, learned senior counsel appearing for the

petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri.G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned standing counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. With their consent, the writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the

admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition has being filed seeking the following prayer:-

“to declare the impugned speaking order No.101/TPS/DC/C1R- 40/SBZ/GHMC/2026 dated 24.03.2026 of the 3rd respondent in asking the petitioner to remove her construction within 15 days in respect of H. No.6-5-102/2, admeasuring 13.33 sq.yards, situated at Besides St. Phelomena Girls High School Road, New Bhoiguda, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Sec.7(2) of Telangana

##PAGE2##

2

State Building Permissions Approval and Self Certification System (TS-

bPASS) Act, 2020.”

3. Brief facts as stated in this writ petition are that petitioner is unmarried and does not have any source of income except depending on tailoring and the petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of H.No.6-5-102/2, admeasuring 13.33 sq.yards, situated beside St. Phelomena Girls High School Road, New Bhoiguda, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad, having acquired the same through registered sale deed bearing document No.632 of 2016 dated 16.04.2016. It is submitted that the subject house was in dilapidated condition and petitioner with an intention to construct a new house, raised pillars on the subject property. While the construction was in progress, respondent No.3 on complaint from one M.Lalithyadav, issued show cause notice bearing No.101/TPS/CIR-40/SBZ/GHMC/2026 dated 21.02.2026, directing the petitioner to show sufficient cause within (15) days from the date of receipt of notice, as to why the unauthorized construction portions shall not be demolished and further directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent No.3 on 27.02.2026 at 4.PM and submit oral and written pleadings with supporting documents, filing which action will be taken as per Rules in force. Thereafter, the petitioner on 26.02.2026 submitted reply to the show cause notice dated 21.02.2026, enclosing a copy of ownership, link documents and other relevant documents. It is further submitted that the petitioner on 09.03.2026 submitted an affidavit on Rs.100/- Non Judicial Bond and requested the Chief City Planner, Town Planning Section, GHMC, Hyderabad, to grant permission

##PAGE3##

3

to construct a small residential house on the subject property and the same is

still pending for consideration.

4. The case of the petitioner is that on 24.03.2026, respondent No.3 issued impugned speaking order bearing No.101/TPS/DC/CIR-40/SBZ/GHMC/2026, stating that on 27.02.2026 hearing was conducted, however, attending the same, petitioner failed to submit copy of ownership documents and directed the petitioner to remove the illegal and unauthorized construction made on the subject property, within (15) days from the date of receipt of order, filing which the GHMC will take action in accordance with law under the provision of GHMC Act, 1955 and the expenses incurred thereof, shall be recovered from

petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

5. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner along with the reply dated 26.02.2026 had enclosed ownership, link documents and all other relevant documents and without verifying the same, the respondent No.3 issued the impugned speaking order dated 24.03.2026, stating that the petitioner had failed to submit the copy of owne

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top