IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V. Shravan Kumar, J
T. Jhansi Rani – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.36014 of 2024 | WRIT PETITION No.35960 of 2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of property acquisition and issuance of building permissions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. procedural requirements for revocation of building permissions based on deviations. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. revocation orders are invalid if based on grounds not specified in the show cause notice. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. section 636(1) of ghmc act is inapplicable to constructions with valid permissions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. final disposal of writ petitions with liberty for lawful action on public land. (Para 19 , 20) |
COMMON ORDER:
Heard Sri Srikanth Hariharan, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.36014 and 35960 of 2024, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1, Sri. Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned standing counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 3 and Sri Sammer Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 in W.P.Nos.36014 and 35960 of 2024.
2. Central Ware Housing Corporation Employees Co-operative Housing Society Ltd (hereinafter referred as “Society”) is respondent No.4 in W.P.No.36014 of 2024 and respondent No.5 in W.P.No.35960 of 2024. As per the averments made in the writ affidavits, the said Society has alienated the subject property in favour of the petitioners by way of Registered Document No.12184 of 2023 dated 11.10.2023. Since the petitioners sole grievance is against the official respondents, as such notice to respondent Nos.4 and 5 is dispensed with.
3. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. The writ petition No.36014 of 2024 has been filed seeking the following prayer:-
“to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more so particularly one in the nature of Mandamus and more specifically A. Declaring the actions of the Respondents more specifically 2nd and 3rd Respondents herein in revoking the Building Permission over land admeasuring 160 Sq yards in Plot No.40, Officers Colony, Saheb Nagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar. Ranga Reddy District vide LR No.40/CIR-3/TBS/GHMC2024, dated 19-11-2024 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 300A of Constitution of India, 1950, Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. 1955 and Rules thereunder and Principles of Natural Justice. B. Consequentially. set aside the revocation order vide LR No.40/CIR-3/TBS/GHMC2024, dated 19-11-2024. C. Consequentially, reinstate the building permission obtained by building permit order vide Application/Permit No. 337825/GHMC/18831/2023, dated 20-10-2023. D. To pass...”
5. The writ petition No.35960 of 2024 has been filed seeking the following prayer:-
“to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more so particularly one in the nature of Mandamus and more specifically A. Declaring the actions of the Respondents more specifically 4th Respondent herein in issuing the demolition notice vide Proc. No 2127/COMM./ HYDR A A/ P. NO 40/2024 dated 13.12.2024 of structures raised over land admeasuring 160 Sq yards in Plot No.40, Officers Colony, Saheb Nagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 300A of Constitution of India, 1950, Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and Rules thereunder and Principles of Natural Justice. B. Consequentially, set aside the demolition notice vide Proc. No 2127/COMM./ HYDRA A/ P. NO 40/2024 dated 13.12.2024. C. To pass...”
6. Since the writ petitioner in both the writ petitions is same and the issues involved in these writ petitions are common, they are being taken up for hearing together and are disposed of by this Common Order.
7. Brief facts as stated in the writ petition Nos.36014 and 35960 of 2024 are that originally, one M. Vijay Prakash, M. Suresh Kumar, and M. Naresh Kumar claimed to be the owners and possessors of land admeasuring 400 Sq.Yards in Plot Nos.39 and 40, Sy.No.68, situ
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.