Motilal Solanki v. State Of Telangana

[ 3168 ] H]GH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 4199 OF 2025 Between:

Motilal Solanki, S/o Business, Rlio. H. No Late Bhonoram Solanki aged about 63 years, Occ 4-8-1 1 31 4 l2l 1, Manjeeranagar, Sangareddy. ...PETITIONER AND State of Telangana, Represented by the Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration, Secretariat, Hyderabad Sangareddy Municipality, Rep by its Commissioner, office at Sangareddy Sangareddy District.

...RESPONDENTS Petition und'er Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in issuing the Notice of Revocation bearing Notice No. 455537/SANGlO992l2O24 dated 20.12.2024 as illegal, unjust, unlawful, and against the principles of Natural Justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent not to interfere with the construction being taken up by the petitioner as per the building permit bearing Applicationi Permit No. 455537/SANG 1099212024 daled 25.11.2O24 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Revocation notice bearing Notice No. bearing Notice No. 455537/5ANG 1099212024 daled 20.1 2.2024

JA.ro,2oF zozf Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent not to interfere with the construction being taken up by the petitioner as per the building permit bearing Application/permit No. 455537/SANG1099212024 dated 25.'t 1.2024 pending the Writ petition Gounsel for the Petitioner: SRl. R VINOD REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY SC FOR MC The Court made the following: ORDER i i

".:t." .r TTIE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRJT PETITION No.4l99 OF 2o25 ORDER:

Heard Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for 2nd respondent.

2.

Petitioner herein is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the plot bearing No.15 part in Survey No.21O (new) and 2 1 1 (old) situated at Manjeeranagar, Sangareddy District, within 2"d respondent Municipality. He has obtained building permission from 2",1 respondent on 25.11.2024 for the construction of a Stilt + Two Upper Floors in Plot No./H.No.4-8-113 lE/2/A/1. He has just started construction and is proceeding with the construction strictly in accordance with the said building permission. While the matter stood thus, 2"d respondent has issued an impugned notice of Revocation dated 20. 12.2024 revoking the building permission basing on the report of the site inspection officer. I l

No reasons were mentioned in the impugned revocation order. The details of the report of the site inspection officer were also not mentioned. Though, in the impugned revocation order dated 20.12.2024, there is reference to the show cause notice dated 07.I2.2O24, according to the petitioner, the sarne was not served on the petitioner. Thus, the impugned revocation order has been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside.

3.

In the light of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside revocation order dated 20. 12.2024, granting liberty to 2.d respondent to initiate action afresh against the petitioner strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019, issue fresh notice and mention reasons for issuance of show cause notice including the details of the site inspection report, call for an explanation from the petitioner and then take action if any, against the petitioner herein. However, he shall complete the said exercise within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the petitioner shali proceed r,r,ith the construction strictly in accordance with the

-v building permission dated 25. 11.2024, failing which liberty is granted to 2"d respondent to take action against the petitioner herein.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

SD/-V. KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGIS //TRUE COPYII s CTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal secretary, Municipar Administration, secretariat, Hyderabad

2. The Commissioner, Sangareddy Municipality, office at Sangareddy Sangareddy District.

3. One CCto SRl. RVTNOD REDDyAdvocate [OpUC]

4. One CC to SRI PUTTA KRTSHNA REDDY SC FOR MC tOpUCl 5 Try! CCs td Gp FoR MCPL ADMN URBAN DEV ,High court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies q \ KKS BS

HIGH COURT DATED:1 310212025 $5 S{A i € i:,* ( ( O 2 7 tEB 2[25

ORDER

WP.No.4199 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o,q''

%