Kolluri Venkateshwarlu vs The State Of Telangana

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1939 Tel
Judgement Date : 4 September, 2023

Telangana High Court
Kolluri Venkateshwarlu vs The State Of Telangana on 4 September, 2023
Bench: T.Vinod Kumar
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

                      Writ Petition No.21490 of 2023

ORDER:

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 02.09.2022, by which, the 3rd respondent had issued a Shortfall Intimation Letter (for short, 'SIL'), pursuant to the application submitted by the petitioner on 23.08.2022 for permission to construct a house in Plot bearing No.W-13 admeasuring 333 square yards in Survey Nos.329/4 and 329/5 situated at Mahadevapuram Residential Project Phase - III, Gajularamaram Village, Quthbullapur Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4 and with their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission.

3. Petitioner contends that he is the owner of Plot bearing No.W-13 admeasuring 333 square yards in Survey Nos.329/4 and 329/5 situated at Mahadevapuram Residential Project Phase - III, Gajularamaram Village, having acquired the same under a registered sale deed dated 24.02.2005. Petitioner further contends that he intended to construct a residential building in the said plot of land and had approached the respondent authorities by submitting an application on 23.08.2022.

2

4. It is further contended that upon the petitioner making the application to the authorities concerned, the petitioner has been issued with the impugned proceeding titled as 'Shortfall Intimation Letter' dated 02.09.2022, wherein multiple shortfalls have been noted and the petitioner was directed to comply with the objections noted therein within 15 days from the date of communication of the same.

5. Petitioner contends that while the petitioner would comply with various objections noted in the SIL, he is aggrieved by Objection No.2, which reads as under:

         Sl.No.    Documents Name                  Remarks

         1.              ....                                       ....

         2.       LRS Proceedings/approved      1) As per the Prohibited property
                  layout & plan copy for        list, the Sy.No.329/4 & 5 is falling
                  approved     plots/previous   Govt Land and also there are court
                  permission copy.              cases pending in said Sy.No.329 of
                                                Gajularamaram Village. Hence,
                                                required NOC from the competent
                                                authority i.e. the District Collector.

                                                2) To submit the original scanned
                                                copy of approved LRS proceedings
                                                and plans.

                                                3) To submit the katcha layout
                                                copy earmarking the proposed site
                                                and master plan road.



6. Petitioner contends that insofar as the above said objection/shortfall noted in the impugned proceeding, this Court had an occasion to consider the same in W.P.No.43031 of 2022 dated 01.12.2022. In the said judgment, while considering the application for grant of building permission, this Court had 3 held as to what aspects need to be looked into while granting building permission.

7. It is also contended that the Writ Appeal, being W.A.No.155 of 2023, preferred by the Municipal Authorities against the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.43031 of 2022 dated 01.12.2022, had also been dismissed, vide judgment dated 03.02.2023. It is further contended that the petitioner stands on the same footing as that of the petitioner in the above said case, and therefore, the shortfall/objection No.2, as noted above, holds no water.

8. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4, while referring to the counter-affidavit filed in the matter, submits that insofar as objection No.2/shortfall noted in SIL is concerned, the same is no longer res integra, in the light of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.155 of 2023. However, learned Standing Counsel would submit that notwithstanding the said objection, the petitioner is required to comply with all other shortfalls noted in the SIL dated 02.09.2022

9. Learned Standing Counsel would further submit that since much time has elapsed after issuing the SIL, the application submitted by the petitioner on 23.08.2022 is no more subsisting and the petitioner is required to make a fresh application which will be considered by the authorities concerned afresh without insisting on production of No-Objection Certification from the competent authority i.e. District Collector, since the said issue has been settled 4 by virtue of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.155 of 2023.

10. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would comply with the other objections raised in the SIL, if the application submitted by him earlier has not been closed by the authorities and in case of its closure, he would make a fresh application enclosing therewith all the relevant documents, including the shortfalls noted in the SIL, except NOC from the District Collector.

11. Having regard to the submissions, made as above, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be directed to comply with the shortfalls as noted in the SIL within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if the application submitted by him for building permission on 23.08.2022 has not been closed by the respondent authorities, by the said date. In the event, the said application submitted by the petitioner has been closed, he is granted liberty to make a fresh application excluding the NOC from the competent authority i.e. District Collector, and upon the petitioner making fresh application, the respondent authorities shall consider the same in accordance with law, without insisting on production of NOC from the District Collector.

12. Subject to the above liberty and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the other objections. No order as to costs.

5

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

___________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date:04.09.2023 Note:

Furnish CC by 06.09.2023.

(B/o) GJ 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition No.21490 of 2023 04.09.2023 GJ