Telangana High Court
Sri. V.Y. Jaswanth Kumar, vs The State Of Telangana, on 8 April, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
Writ Petition No.8817 of 2024
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed to for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not considering the representations/complaints dt.30.01.2024 and 27.03.2024 submitted by the petitioner and not discharging their statutory duties for taking action against the illegal and unauthorized construction made by the 4th respondent at H.No.12-2-876/3,4, Asifnagar, Hyderabad, as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of the GHMC Act, 1955.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner through Hybrid Mode, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri K.Siddharth Rao, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.
3. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage and the lis involved in this Writ Petition, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent Nos.4 and 5 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.
2
4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the unofficial respondents without any permission from respondent Nos.2 and 3 have commenced the construction of an illegal structure without following the building rules.
5. Petitioner further contends that on the unofficial respondents commencing construction of a residential house, he had approached the respondents-authorities and submitted several complaints dt.30.01.2024 and 27.03.2024 bringing to the notice of the respondents-authorities the illegal and unauthorized construction being made by the unofficial respondents and sought for initiation of action for the removal of the said construction in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
6. Petitioner further contends that in spite of the petitioner bringing to the notice of the respondents-authorities of the unauthorized and illegal construction being made by the unofficial respondents, no action is taken, while the authorities are bestowed with powers to cause inspection and also take steps to bring down/remove any unauthorized and illegal construction that is being made by exercising powers conferred on them under the Act.
7. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the unofficial respondents have obtained building permission for construction of stilt + two upper floors, 3 but however, had constructed two additional floors i.e. 3rd and 4th floors over the building.
8. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that even before the petitioner approaching the respondents-authorities and submitting representations, the authorities in exercise of powers conferred on them under the Act have caused inspection and noticed the said unauthorized and illegal construction being made by the unofficial respondents and accordingly, issued a show cause notice dt.30.12.2023 calling upon the unofficial respondents to submit an explanation as to why action should not be initiated against the construction being made in deviation of the sanction plan.
9. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that as the unofficial respondents did not submit any explanation, the authorities have passed a Speaking Order dt.18.01.2024, whereby the construction of additional two floors was held to be unauthorized and illegal, warranting action for removal/demolition of the same under the Act.
10. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that on the respondents- authorities passing the aforesaid Speaking Order, the unofficial respondents have approached the Court of Civil jurisdiction by filing a suit vide O.S.No.433 of 2024 and obtained an order of status quo in 4 I.A.No.248 of 2024 on 02.02.2024 on the file of the IV Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
11. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that even before the respondents-authorities initiating steps for enforcing the Speaking Order, the above mentioned order of status quo was passed by the Court of Civil jurisdiction and that the respondents-authorities are taking steps to file counter/written statement to get the order of status quo vacated, for them to take further action on the Speaking Order passed.
12. Learned Standing Counsel thus submits that it is on account of the order of status quo passed by the Court of Civil jurisdiction, the authorities could not take further steps for enforcing the Speaking Order dt.18.01.2024, and assures this Court that the authorities would take all the relevant measures in an expeditious manner for getting the order of status quo vacated.
13. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.
14. Though the petitioner had alleged that the unofficial respondents are making unauthorized and illegal construction and inaction on the part of the respondents-authorities in dealing with such unauthorized and illegal construction, the facts narrated above indicate the respondents- authorities initiating action firstly by issuing a show cause notice dt.30.12.2023 and thereafter, secondly, by passing a Speaking Order 5 dt.18.01.2024 with regard to the unauthorized and illegal construction made by the unofficial respondents.
15. Thus, it cannot be said that the respondents-authorities did not take or initiate action on the complaint made by the petitioner. However, it is to be noted that against the aforesaid Speaking Order passed by the official respondents, the unofficial respondents having approached the Court of Civil jurisdiction and obtained an order of status quo by filing a suit, the respondents-authorities were prevented from taking steps for enforcement of the aforesaid Speaking Order.
16. Though learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents have stated to this Court that the respondents-authorities are taking steps to get the aforesaid order of status quo vacated, it is to be noted that the impugned order being an order passed by the authorities in exercise of their powers under the Act, in discharge of their statutory functions, a Division Bench of this Court had an occasion to deal with the Civil Courts granting order of status quo/injunction against the orders passed under the statute, particularly dealing with unauthorized and illegal construction being interfered by passing an order of status quo, in the case of M unicipal Corporation of Hyderabad v/ s. Philom ena Education Foundation 1 , and the said judgment is reiterated by the High 1 2008 (2) ALD 1 6 Court by issuing Office Order, vide Circular dt.20.02.2017 in ROC.No.7/Reg.Judl/2017, which was yet again reiterated in Circular dt.08.11.2023 in ROC.No.14/Reg.Judl/2023, whereby Civil Courts were directed to exercise caution while granting order of status quo .
17. Since, position of law has already been laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgment and as has been brought to the notice of the Judicial Officers by the High Court by issuing circulars, this Court is of the view that the respondents-authorities should be directed to take steps by filing counter and vacate petition in the aforesaid suit instituted by the unofficial respondents against the Speaking Order dt.18.01.2024 and take steps to get the said status quo order vacated and thereafter initiate action for enforcing the Speaking Order dt.18.01.2024 in an expeditious manner. Petitioner is also at liberty to seek his impleadment in the aforesaid suit and take steps to bring to the notice of the concerned Court the legal position for vacating the order of status quo/injunction.
18. Subject to above observation and liberty, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
19. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
___________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date:08.04.2024 GJ