Telangana High Court
E. Ravindranath, vs The Principal Secretary on 22 July, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.19242 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri S.Abhay Kumar Sagar, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2, and perused the record. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal.
2. 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 respondents is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the unofficial respondents are making construction without having any valid permission from the respondent authorities; that the petitioner approached the respondent authorities and lodged complaint; and that though the 2nd respondent authority had passed a speaking order on 21-03-2024, no steps are being taken to enforce the 2 aforesaid speaking order, which action of the respondent authorities, it is contended as highly illegal and arbitrary.
4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of 2nd respondent has placed before this Court the written instructions under the signature of the Commissioner.
5. By the said written instructions, it is stated that on the respondent authorities passing the speaking order dated 21-03-2024 directing the respondent No.4 and 8 others to remove the unauthorized construction within 15 days, the unofficial respondents in the present Writ Petition have approached the Court of civil jurisdiction and filed suit vide O.S.No.43 of 2024 and obtained an order of injunction vide I.A.No.102 of 2024 on 14-06-024.
6. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that on the concerned Court of civil jurisdiction passing the injunction order in the suit filed by the unofficial respondent herein, the respondent authorities have filed a counter-affidavit in the matter and the said suit is pending adjudication.
7. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that on the Court of civil jurisdiction vacating/dismissing the interim order granted, the 3 authorities would take further steps for enforcing the speaking order dated 21-03-2024.
8. On the aforesaid submission being made by the learned Standing Counsel, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would also take steps to seek impleadment in the aforesaid pending proceedings before the Court of civil jurisdiction.
9. Having regard to the submissions made as above, since the 2nd respondent had already initiated action against the unauthorized and illegal construction made by the unofficial respondents by passing a speaking order dated 21-03-2024, against which a suit vide O.S.No.43 of 2024 has been filed before the IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, this Court is of the view that the respondent authorities as well as the petitioner, who had stated that he would also take steps to implead himself in the aforesaid pending proceedings, are to be directed to bring to the notice of the concerned Court of civil jurisdiction the judgment of this Court in Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Vs. Philomena Education Foundation of India1 1 2008(2) ALD 1 4 and the Circulars issued by the High Court in the year 2017, reiterated on 08-11-2023 enabling the Court of civil jurisdiction to take further action in the matter.
10. Subject to above observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
11. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand closed.
___________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date: 22.07.2024 Vsv