Telangana High Court
Nayeem Siddiqui Mohammed Nayeem ... vs State Of Telangana on 26 April, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
Writ Petition No.11263 of 2024
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed to for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not demolishing the illegal and unauthorized ongoing construction of Ground + four upper floors raised by the unofficial respondent No.6 in the premises bearing Municipal No.14-1- 430/13 situated at Rocket Ground, Aghapura, Hyderabad, in spite of bringing to the notice of the respondents-authorities by way of representation dt.22.02.2024, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, besides gross violation of the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 to 5 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 No.6 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.
2
4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the petitioner contends that the unofficial respondent No.6, who is the owner and occupier of residential property bearing Municipal No.14-1-430/13 situated at Rocket Ground, Aghapura, Hyderabad, had taken up construction of building, consisting of four upper floors without obtaining any permission and without following the building rules and regulations.
5. Petitioner further contends that on noticing the aforesaid unauthorized and illegal construction taken by up the unofficial respondent, he had approached the respondents-authorities and submitted a representation dt.22.02.2024 bringing to the notice of the authorities the aforesaid unauthorized and illegal construction undertaken by the unofficial respondent and sought for demolition of the same.
6. Petitioner further contends that in spite of the aforesaid representation having been submitted by the petitioner, no action is taken and on the other hand, the unofficial respondent is proceeding with the unauthorized and illegal construction.
7. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 5 has placed before this Court written instructions under the signature of the 5th respondent.
8. By the written instructions, it is stated that the unofficial respondent had obtained building permission for construction of individual 3 residential building consisting of stilt + two upper floors on 07.12.2023, and contrary to the said building permission, the unofficial respondent has already laid slab for third floor and the authorities noticing the unauthorized and illegal construction undertaken by the unofficial respondent have caused a show cause notice on 221.01.2024 and called upon the unofficial respondent to submit explanation/reply to the same.
9. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that since, the unofficial respondent did not submit any explanation to the show cause notice issued, the authorizes have passed a Speaking Order dt.05.02.2024 holding the construction being made by the unofficial respondent to be unauthorized and illegal construction and called upon the unofficial respondent to remove the same within a period of 15 days from the date of Speaking Order.
10. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that upon the respondents-authorities passing the Speaking Order, the unofficial respondent had approached the Court of Civil jurisdiction and filed a civil suit, vide O.S.No.378 of 2024 and obtained an order of status quo in I.A.No.208 of 2024 on the file of the IV Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
11. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the unofficial respondent having obtained an order of status quo by approaching the Court of Civil jurisdiction, however, in violation of the said status quo order 4 was proceeding with the further construction, and thus, the authorities have also issued a letter dt.27.02.2024 calling upon the unofficial respondent to stop further construction, as the same would be in violation of the order of status quo.
12. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the respondents- authorities are taking steps to get the order of status quo vacated in the aforesaid suit instituted by the unofficial respondent.
13. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that on the order of status quo being vacated by the Court of Civil jurisdiction, the respondents-authorities would take steps for enforcing the Speaking Order dt.05.02.2024.
14. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will also take steps to implead himself in the aforesaid suit and bring to the notice of the concerned Court, the misrepresentation and suppression of fact resorted to by the unofficial respondent, while approaching the Court and obtaining an order of status quo, and also the order passed a Division Bench of this Court 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 Court by issuing Office Order, vide Circular dt.20.02.2017 in ROC.No.7/Reg.Judl/2017, which was 1 2008 (2) ALD 1 5 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 , for getting the order of status quo vacated.
15. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.
16. Having regard to the submissions made as above, this Court is of the view that the respondents-authorities as well as the petitioner are at liberty to bring to the notice of the concerned Civil Court the order of Division Bench of this Court in Philom ena Education Foundation 's case (supra) as well as the Circulars dt.20.02.2017 and 08.11.2023 and seek for vacating the order of status quo passed by the Court of Civil jurisdiction in I.A.No.208 of 2024 in O.S.No.378 of 2024. Upon the order of status quo being vacated, the respondents-authorities shall take steps for enforcing the Speaking Order in an expeditious manner.
17. Subject to above observation and liberty, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
18. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
___________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date:26.04.2024 GJ 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition No.11263 of 2024 26.04.2024 GJ 7