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) 13335

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V.Shravan Kumar, J
Asfia Batool – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
IA No.2 of 2026|WRIT PETITION No.29633 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Learned counsel for the petitioner
For the Respondents: Government Pleader for MA&UD, Sri.M.Arun Kumar (Standing Counsel for GHMC), Assistant Government Pleader for Home

Municipal authorities are statutorily mandated to examine and initiate action against unauthorized construction upon receipt of a complaint, following due process of law that includes providing an opportunity of hearing to both the complainant and the person alleged to have violated building norms.

Headnote:(A) Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 - Sections 428, 433, 451, 452, 456, 461-A, 636 - Telangana State Building Permission Approval and Self Certification System (TS-BPASS) Act, 2020 - Section 7(6) - Unauthorized construction - Complaint filed by petitioner regarding neighbour’s illegal construction deviating from sanctioned building permit - High Court directed competent authorities to consider complaint by issuing notice to both parties and passing a reasoned order in accordance with law - Principle reiterated that unauthorized constructions cannot be encouraged and municipal authorities must act strictly within statutory framework.

Facts of the case:
The petitioner alleged that the private respondent was carrying out construction activities in violation of the sanctioned building permit, including violating setback norms and demolishing a shared compound wall. Despite complaints filed with municipal authorities, no action was taken, leading the petitioner to approach the High Court for a prompt resolution.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the municipal authorities possess adequate statutory powers to inspect, issue show-cause notices, and initiate demolition or sealing of unauthorized structures. The court directed the concerned Zonal Commissioner to adjudicate the complaint after providing a fair hearing to both parties within four weeks.

Issues: Whether the municipal authorities are under a statutory obligation to address complaints of illegal construction and ensure compliance with building permit terms.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that municipal authorities cannot remain passive towards complaints of unauthorized construction and that all proceedings must follow the due process of notice and opportunity for hearing as prescribed by local municipal laws.

Result: Writ petition and interlocutory application disposed of with directions for administrative action.

Table of Content
1. summary of facts involving unauthorized construction complaints. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. statutory powers of municipal commissioners under relevant acts. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
3. judicial precedent condemning unauthorized construction and the mandate of due process. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
4. court order directing authorities to dispose of complaints according to law. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for MA&UD appearing for respondent No.1, Sri.M.Arun Kumar, learned standing counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 8 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 6. With their consent, the writ petition is being taken up for disposal.

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

“to declare the inaction of the Respondents Nos.2 and 3 in not taking any action in demolishing the illegal structure constructed by the Respondent No.7 in H.No.12-2-418/3/32 and 12-2-418/3/32/A, Vishwas Nagar Cooperative Housing Society, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad, by violating the building permit order bearing Permit No.0294/GHMC/KHB/2025-BP dated 15.03.2025 despite the representations given by the petitioner on 16.09.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents No.2 and 3 to demolish the illegal structure constructed by the Respondent No.7 in H.No.12-2-418/3/32 and 12-2-418/3/32/A, Vishwas Nagar Cooperative Housing Society, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad.”

3. Brief facts as stated in this writ petition are that the petitioner claims that her husband i.e., Sri.Syed Yahya Razvi, is the owner and possessor of house bearing No.12-2-418/3/31, admeasuring to an extent of 394 Sq.yards, in Plot No.31, Sy.No.57/1, Vishwas Nagar Cooperative Housing Society, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad, having acquired the same through registered sale deed dated 07.01.1983. It is submitted that the petitioner’s husband died on 31.10.2023 and the petitioner is continuing to reside in the said property. The case of the petitioner is that her neighbour i.e., respondent No.7 had obtained building permit order bearing No.0294/GHMC/KHB/2025-BP dated 15.03.2025, for construction of building with stilt + four floors on house bearing Nos.12-2-418/3/32 and 12-2-418/3/32/A, in Vishwas Nagar Cooperative Housing Society, Gudimalkapur, however, in deviation to the permit order dated 15.03.2025, respondent No.7 had not left any setbacks and is constructing a cellar by demolishing the petitioner’s compound wall. Hence, the petitioner on 16.09.2025 made a complaint and requested the respondent authorities to take action against the illegal construction and the same is still pending for consideration. Aggrieved by the pending consideration, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court on 26.09.2025, directed the respondent No.3-the Zonal Commissioner, Khairatabad Zone, to forthwith take action on the petitioner’s complaint dated 16.09.2025 regarding unauthorized construction being raised by respondent No.7 in deviation of permit order bearing No.0294/GHMC/KHB/2025-BP dated 15.03.2025, by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondent No.7 and pass orders in accordance with law. It is further submitted that on 24.12.2025, this Court again directed respondent No.3 to stop the unauthorized construction made by respondent No.7 on the subject property. However, till date no action is initiated.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submit that subsequent to the aforesaid orders, the Government vide G.O.Ms.Nos.292 dated 24.12.2025, re-organized the GHMC into different zones and in view of the same, the subject property fell under the jurisdiction of the Zonal Commissioner, Golconda Zone. Hence, the petitioner on 21.01.2026, filed I.A.No.2 of 2026 in this writ petition, seeking direction to responde

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