M.Karthik Reddy v. State Of Telangana

[ 3168 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE THIRry FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 36920 OF 2024 Between:

,eddy, Aged 40 Years, nthapur, Hyderabad-5000'1 3 R/o M.Karthik Reddy, S/o M.Srinivas R 34- 631191176/1, Sri Ramanapuram, Rama ...PETITIONER AND '1. State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Se and Urban Development Departrnent, Secn

2. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporat Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad

3. The Commissioner, The Greater Hyderaba< Uppal, Hyderabad

4. Sri Kancharla Dileep Kumar, S/o. Late Kanc Majors, Rl/o. H.No.24-56, Gandhi Nagar, U Malkajgiri District.

5. Sri Nethi Santhosh Kumar, S/o.Late Nethi h Rio. H.No.24-56, Gandhi Nagar, Uppal (V) Malkajgiri District.

6. Sri L.Satyanaryana, S/o.L.Krishna Murthy, / 56, Gandhi Nagar, Uppal (V), Uppal Manda

7. Sri Bussa Srinivas, S/o. Late Bussa Rama Chandraiah All are Age Majors, R/o. H.No.24-56, Gandhi Nagar, Uppal (V), Uppal Mandal, MedchalMalkajgiri District.

8. Sri Narsaiah, S/o. K.Venkaiah All are Age Majors, R/o. H-No.2-4-56' Gandhi Nagar, Uppal (V), Uppal Mandal, Medc-hal-Malkajgiri District. fcretary, Municipal Administration 'tariat, Hyderabad ion, Rep. by its Commissioner, I Municipal Corporation, Circle-ll, harla Buchi Ramutu, All are Age bpal (V), Uppal Mandal, Medchallrishna Murthy, All are Age Majors, I Uppal Mandal, Medchal- \ll are Age Majors, R/o. H.No.24l, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

9. Sri Chukka Reddy Kethi Reddy, S/o. Malla Reddy Kethi Reddy R/9.{ ry9.2- . fi-126n6, Nearby Ganesh Telmple, Sri Ragaveridra Nagar Uppal M, Uppal Mandal, Medchal-{Vlalkajgiri District.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 to 3 and its officials in not taking any action against the unauthorized construction as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the GHMC Act and further direct the Respondent No.2 to 3 to demolish the construction in accordance with the Act.

lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 Respondent No. 2 to 3 to take immediate action against the illegal construction made by Respondent No.4, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. M SRIKANTH counsel for the Respondent No.l: Gp FoR MUNrclpAL ADMlNrsrRATroN AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI p. SRINIVAS RAO, S.C. FOR GREATER HYDERABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 9: --- The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LIIKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.36920 of2024 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner' learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.l and Sri Srinivas Rao Pachwa' learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos'2 and 3' Perused the record.

2.Inviewo[thenatureofreliefsoughtbythepetitioner' this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage dispensing with notice to respondent Nos'4 to 9' 3.

Petitioner is resident of Sri Ramanapuram'

Ramanthapur in Uppal' Respondent Nos'4 to 9 are making constructions without leaving setbacks in uppal' Therefore' petitioner has submitted a representation' dated 12.12.2024 to respondent No'2 with a request to take action against respondent Nos'4 to 9' Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation' respondent No'2

KL,.

W.P.No.36920 of 2024 did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent No.2, petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4.

Whereas, Sri Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, on instructions, would submit that respondent No.2 will consider the said representation dated 12.L2.2O24 submitted by the petitioner and take action against respondent Nos.4 to 9 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Greater Hyderabad Municipal C:orporations Act, 1955 (for short .the Ar:t, 1955,) by putting the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 to 9 on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. 5.

In the light of the said submissions, this Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation, dated 12.12.2024 submitted by the petitioner and take action against respondent Nos.4 to 9 strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Act, 191i5, by putting the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 to 9 (rn notice and affording them an opportunit5z

ffiffi:-"]r'

,, KL,J W.P.No.36920 of 2024 ,l I J within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs' As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed'

SdI- P. PADMANABHA DDY ASSISTANT TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION FICER To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administrat'ron and Urban Development Departmerit, Secretariat, Hyderabad

2. The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation' Tank Bund Road, HYderabad 3.TheCommissioner,TheGreaterHyderabadMunicipalCorporation,Circle-ll, Uppal, HYderabad

4. One CC to SRI M. SRIKANTH' Advocate [OPUC] I\

5. Two ccs to GP for Municipal Administration- and Urban Development, High " cilrtt-r"'r. ti6 State ot i.tanlana at Hyderabad' [oUTl

6. One CC to SRI P. SRINIVAS RAO, S'C' for Greater Hyderabad lVlunicipal CorPoration [OPUC]

7. Two CD CoPies KKS MP \

\ HIGH COURT DATED:3111212024 A .-{:

1t'l o Ct .5 2 5 FrB 206 t * )Fs, ^.T CH9O

ORDER

WP.No.36920 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WTHOUT COSTS