Sri Ramanagoni Venketsh v. The State Of Telangana
[ 3168 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 35573 OF 2024 Between:
Sri Ramanagoni Venketsh, S/o Ramanagoni Anjaiah, aged about 39 years, Occ; Business, Ryo H.No.1-87i3, Thangadpally Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana State.
.,...PETITIONER AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secreta Administration and Urban Development Department, Hyderabad.
ry S , Municipal ecretariat Building,
2. The Choutuppal Municipality, Rep. by its Commissioner, Choutuppal, Yadari Bhuvanagiri District.
3. Smt Ettagoni Ranamma, Wo, E.Jangaiah, Aged about 38 years, Occ Home Maker, Fl/o H.No.5-18i1, Thangadpally Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.
.....RESPONDENTS Petition Under 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, by declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in passing revocation order l-;ts.174 (4) (10) of Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019, vide No. 412427lCHUTlO259l2O24, Dated 08-08-2O24, on petitioner's House bearing No. 1-134 (Assessment No.1256500134), Admeasuring 140:00 Sq. Yds., equivalent to 117.04 Sq. Mtrs., Situated at Gramakantam, Thangadaplly, Under Choutuppal Municipality Limits, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, as arbitrary, illegal, unlaMul and contrary to principles of nature of justice and infringement
,/ fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the constitution of lndia and consequently, to set aside the same by restoring the building permit No.412427lcHUTlo25gl2o24, Dated o8-o7-2024, on above said subject property. I.A.NO:1 OF 2024 PetitionUnderSectionl5lcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedto suspend the impugned revocation order No. 412427ICHUT1025912024, Dated 0B08-2024, on the petitioner's House bearing No 1-134(Assessment No.1256500134), Admeasuring 140.00 Sq' Yds', equivalent lo llT'O4 Sq' Mtrs" Situated at " Gramakantam", Thangadaplly, Under, choutuppal Municipality Limits, choutuppal Mandal, Yadari Bhuvanagiri District during the pendency of the above writ Petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI METTU SHANKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the ResPondent No.3 : - The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER
/ / HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.35573 of 2o24 ORDER:
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Reddy Putta, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2. Perused the record.
2. In view of the nature of relief sought by the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage dispensing with notice to respondent No.3.
3.
Petitioner herein is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of house bearing No.1-134 (Assessment No.1256500134), admeasuring l4O Sq. yards, situated at Gramakantam, Thangadapally, within respondent No.2 - Municipality, on the strength of a registered sale deed bearing document No.7OO7 of 2023, dated 30.09.2023. It was in dilapidated condition.
Therefore, he has obtained building permit order, dated Oa.O7.2024 from respondent No.2 under TSbPASS by way
KL,J W.P.No.35573 of 2024 of self-declaration a,d self-certification for construction of residential house. Construction is at initial stage. He has laid pillars. On receipt of complaint from respondent No.3, respondent No.2 has issued revocation order dated 08.o8.2024.
4. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that respondent No.2 did not serve Show Cause Notice dated 2O.O7.2O24 to the petitioner herein. But, the petitioner herein has submitted explanation, the same has been examined in detail and found un-satisfactory. Even in the revocation order dated O8.O9.2O24 there is no reference to the explanation submitted by petitioner herein. However, in the 2nd page of the said revocation order there is mention about submission of reply, examination of the same and found tJlat it is un-satisfactory. Even, respondent No.2 did not mention the violation committed by the petitioner and the grounds on which the said building permit order of the petitioner dated OS.OZ.2024 was revoked. Therefore, impugned revocation order dated '
KL,J W.P.No.35573 of 2024 O8,O8.2O24 issued by respondent No.2 is in violation of principles of natural justice and also the procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipatities Act, 2O19' Therefore, without going into the merits and demerits of the case, only the said ground the impugned revocation order dated O8.O8.2O24 issued by respondent No'2 is liable to be set aside.
5. Perusal of the record also would reveal that on receipt of the complaint from respondent No'3, respondent No.2 has issued another Show Cause Notice dated 25.10.2024 stating that there are Civil disputes pending between petitioner and respondent No'3 vide O.S.No.286 of 2023. Therefore, respond'ent No'2 directed the petitioner to stop construction. Seven days time was granted to the petitioner herein to submit explanation' However, petitioner did not submit any explanation to the said Show Cause Notice.
6. Perusal of the record would further reveal that respondent No.3 herein has filed the aforesaid suit vide
KL,J W.P.No.35573 of 2024 O.S.No.286 of 2023 against the father of the petitioner herein seeking perpetual injunction. The sarne is pending. There is no interim order.
7. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned revocation order dated O8.O8.2O24 issued by respondent No.2 and the matter is remanded back to respond.ent No.2 with a direction to initiate fresh action by issuing fresh Show Cause Notice to the petitioner herein by specifically mentioning the allegations leveled against the petitioner including the misrepresentation of facts, if any, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the said . Show Cause Notice, petitioner shall submit explanation within 7 days from the date of receipt of said Show Cause Notice. Respondent No.2 shall consider the same and take action, strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under Telangana Municipalities Act, 2}lg, by putting the petitioner and respondent No.3 on notice and i j
KL,J W.P.No.35573 of 2024 affording them an opportunity of hearing. He shall complete the said exercise within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of explanation from the petitioner herein. Till then, respondent No.2 is directed not to proceed further pursuant to the impugned revocation order dated 08.08.2024 and Show Cause Notice, dated 25.1O.2024. However, petitioner shall make construction, strictly in accordance with the said building permit order dated Oa.O7.2O24, failing which liberty is granted to respondent No.2 to take action against the petitioner, in accordance with law. If petitioner failed to submit explanation within the aforesaid time, liberty is granted to respondent No.2 to take action against the petitioner, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. SD/.P.PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANTREGISTRAR / //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER To
1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Building, State of Te{angana at Hyderabad.
2. Th6 Commissioner, Choutuppal Municipality, Choutuppal, Yadari Bhuvanagiri District.
a:fi4'l
f
3. Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADMN AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTJ
4. One CC to SRI METTU SHANKAR, Advocate [OPUC]
5. One CC to SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDY, Advocate (OPUC)
6. Two CD Copies / SA LS
\\ HIGH COURT \ DATED:1 811212024 R 1HE S <.
,.) Ll 0 I JAt'l 2025 (
ORDER
C) * ./ WP.No.35573 of 2024 c€5PArcHEq "r DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS.
q