K.Manickam v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ***** W.P.No.31222 of 2012 Between:

K. Manickam ... Petitioner/Appellant (s) And The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and 2 others ... Respondent (s) DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 11.08.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

Yes/No Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reports/Journals Yes/No Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

Yes/No HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.31222 OF 2012

O R D E R

The case of the petitioner is that he is owner of the plots bearing No.5 and 7 in Sy.No.790 in an extent of 316 sq.yards at Azmathnagar, Uppalkalan, Ranga Reddy District having purchased the same through Registered Document No.548 of 1993.

Subsequently, when the petitioner started construction, the respondent authorities objected the same on the ground that the said plots are in un-approved layout. Then, the petitioner approached the 1st respondent and got regularised the said plots vide proceedings dated 29.10.2011. Thereafter, he obtained permission from the 1st respondent for construction in the said plots vide proceedings No.7334/DC/EZ/Circle.II/2011, dated 15.12.2011 and started construction strictly in accordance with the permission granted. While so, the respondent authorities started interfering with the construction activity of the petitioner stating that construction is being made in deviation of the approved plan. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

This Court while ordering Notice before admission on 05.10.2012 granted interim order stating that "the respondents shall not interfere with the construction of the petitioner in the subject property so long as it is strictly in accordance with the permission granted by the Corporation until further orders".

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the construction is already completed without any deviations.

Sri P.Krishna Reddy, learned Standing counsel for the respondents submits that in case any deviations are found, the respondent authorities may be permitted to take action. Since the construction is completed in terms of the interim order granted by this Court on 05.10.2012, this writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the respondent authorities to take action against the

petitioner, in case the petitioner has committed any violations or deviations while making constructions. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J Date: 11.08.2015 dv