IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION NO.41413 OF 2015 Date: 16.02.2026 Between:

Purushottam Vyas, S/o.Late Kishanlal Vyas, Aged about 55 years, Occ:Business, R/o.15-1-417, Feelkhana, Hyderabad.

…. Petitioner and State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others.

…. Respondents

ORDER

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“...to issue an appropriate Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 2^nd and 3^rd respondents in proposing demolish the building in premises No 15-1-417, Feel Khana, Hyderabad, while the application for building regularization under G.O.Ms.No.152 dated 2-11-2015 is pending consideration by the

respondents 1 to 3, as illegal, arbitrary, in violative of principles of

natural justice, and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish

the building in premises No.15-1-0417, Feel Khana, Hyderabad...”

2. Heard Mr.Srinivasa Rao Velivela, learned counsel for

petitioner as well as Mr.Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing

Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation representing respondent Nos.2 and 3. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in proposing to demolish the building at premises No. 15-1-417, Feel Khana, Hyderabad, while the petitioner’s application for regularization under G.O.Ms. No. 152 dated 02.11.2015 is pending, is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice.

4. It is contended that the petitioner, along with her late mother, were the lawful owners of the property and have obtained valid building permission on 22.03.2013 vide Permit No. 21624/DC/SZ/Cir-5/2012 for constructing a building comprising a cellar, ground floor, and four upper floors. The petitioner became the absolute owner of the property pursuant to a Will Deed dated

19.11.2011, upon the death of her mother on 28.03.2014.

5. Learned counsel further submits that initially, GHMC officials attempted to interfere with the petitioner’s construction without following due process and the competent Civil Court had granted a status quo order restraining such action, confirming that the petitioner was entitled to protection of her lawful rights.

6. It is further submitted that respondent No.1 issued G.O.Ms.No. 152 dated 02.11.2015, which provided a scheme for regularization of constructions made prior to 28.10.2015. The said scheme mandates that applications for regularization are to be filed within two months and penal action can only be initiated in respect of unauthorized constructions for which either no application is filed or the application is rejected.

7. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner had duly filed an application for regularization on 24.11.2015, paying the requisite fee, and the same is still pending adjudication. Hence, the building is fully covered under the regularization scheme, and demolition at this stage would defeat the purpose of the scheme.

8. It is contended that in the meantime, respondent No.4 filed Writ Petition No.37186 of 2015 against the petitioner without serving any notice, this Court on 17.11.2015 appearance of the Commissioner. On 24.11.2025, the respondents even before complying with such direction proceeded with the demolition of the building on 23.11.2015, such action is illegal, as it violated the petitioner’s right to be heard and bypassed due process.

9. Learned counsel submits that in Writ Appeal No. 1105 of 2015, filed by the petitioner challenging the order in W.P.No.37186 of 2015 the Hon’ble Division Bench observed that there was no positive direction against the petitioner and that any alleged demolition pending adjudication of a regularization application must be challenged by way of a fresh writ petition. The petitioner, therefore, approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition afres