Telangana High Court
Shaik Ansar Ahmed vs The State Of Telangana on 3 January, 2025
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.100 of 2025
ORDER:
Heard Sri C. Hari Preeth, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2. Perused the record.
2. This writ petition is filed challenging the final order dated 16.12.2024 issued by respondent No.2.
3. Petitioner Nos.1 to 3 are owners and possessors of the attached properties consisting of three (3) shops situated at H.Nos.9-40/1, 9-41 and 9-40 respectively, situated at Padmavathi Nagar, Khanapur Town and Mandal, Nirmal District, presently under respondent No.2
- Municipality (for short, 'subject property'). It is their ancestral properties. The subject property was KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 2 constructed after duly obtaining permission from the then Gram Panchayat Secretary, Khanapur Panchayat. Petitioners are in possession of the subject property and paying property tax to respondent No.2. Even then, respondents tried to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property without following due procedure laid down under law. Therefore, they have filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.18404 of 2022. When the said writ petition came up for hearing, on 11.04.2022, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 - Municipality, on instructions, submitted to this Court that respondent No.2 - Municipality is removing the encroachments on the existing 100 feet road and they will follow due process of law. Recording the said submission of learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondent No.2 - Municipality, this Court disposed of the said Writ Petition directing respondent No.2 - Municipality not to interfere with the petitioners possession over the subject property without following due process of law. Two and half years KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 3 thereafter, respondent No.2 - Municipality has issued notice, dated 19.11.2024 to the petitioners to submit documents such as Sanctioned Building Permission copy and ownership documents and other documents, if any, in respect of H.Nos.9-40/1, 9-41 and 9-40, situated at Padmavathi Nagar, Khanapur, within seven (7) days. Petitioners have submitted following documents vide its reply, dated 25.11.2024:
1. Copy of Notice No.G1/001/2024, dated 19.11.2024.
2. Order copy in W.P.No.18404 of 2022
3. Proceeding of Executive Office Gram Panchayath Khanapur, dated 28.01.1985
4. House Tax Payments receipts up to 2025
4. Thereafter, respondent No.2 has passed the impugned final order, dated 16.12.2024 stating that petitioners made construction by encroaching 90 Sq. yards of Nirmal to Khanapur Police Station 100 feet wide road. Report submitted by AD, Survey and Land Records, Nirmal district was relied upon. The site is situated at Padmavathi Colony, Khanapur and it is, to be removed. Petitioners failed to give valid explanation to the notice, KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 4 dated 19.11.2024. Therefore, respondent No.2 - Municipality directed the petitioners to remove the un- authorized construction within 15 days. Challenging the said final order, petitioners filed the present writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that vide notice, dated 19.11.2024, respondent No.2 requested the petitioners to furnish documents and petitioners have furnished documents. But, respondent No.2 did not state about the alleged deviated portion or un-authorized construction specifically in the said notice. Without considering the documents and explanation, dated 25.11.2024 submitted by the petitioner, respondent No.2 has issued final order, dated 16.12.2024. The same is in violation of procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019. He has placed reliance on the principles laid down in the following two (2) judgments:
KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 5
1. Musunuru Rajani v. Vijayawada Municipal Corporation, Vijayawada1
2. Common order, dated 25.04.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.27201 of 2021 and 1986 of 2022.
6. Whereas, Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has produced written instructions of respondent No.2, wherein it is stated that respondent No.2 has issued notice, dated 19.11.2024 and petitioners failed to submit explanation properly. On instructions, he would further submit that entire construction is illegal. Therefore, respondent No.2 has issued notice, dated 19.11.2024 and considered the reply, dated 25.11.2024 submitted by the petitioners before passing final order. Therefore, there is no irregularity.
7. As discussed supra, vide order dated 11.04.2022 in W.P.No.18404 of 2022 this Court directed the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners 1 2005 (3) ALD 87 KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 6 possession over the subject properties without following due process of law. Therefore, respondent No.2 has to follow the procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 by specifically mentioning the deviated portion of the construction in the notice, dated 19.11.2024. Without mentioning the deviated portion or un-authorized construction specifically in the notice, dated 19.11.2024, respondent No.2 requested the petitioners to furnish certain documents. Petitioners have submitted copies of notice No.G1/001/2024, dated 19.11.2024, order in W.P.No.18404 of 2022, Proceeding of Executive Office Gram Panchayath Khanapur, dated 28.01.1985 and house Tax Payments receipts up to 2025 to respondent No.2. In fact, petitioners have to submit permission obtained by them from the then Gram Panchayath. Even now, they have not filed the permission obtained by them from the then Gram Panchayat, Khanapur. They have filed only renewal proceedings.
KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 7
8. Though the petitioners are contending that they have obtained permission from the then Gram Panchayat, Khanapur, they have not submitted the same to respondent No.2 along with their reply, dated 25.11.2024 and they have not filed copy of the same before this Court.
9. As discussed supra, respondent No.2 - Municipality did not specifically mention that the petitioners have made construction by encroaching into 90 Sq. yards in the notice, dated 19.11.2024. Now, in the final order, dated 16.12.2024, respondent No.2 - Municipality directed the petitioners to remove the un-authorized construction made by the petitioners encroaching 90 Sq. yards i.e., Nirmal to Khanapur Police Station. There is also reference to the report submitted by AD, Survey and Land Records, Nirmal district.
10. It is the specific case of the petitioners herein that the said report was behind back of the petitioners and KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 8 while conducting the alleged survey no opportunity was given to them.
11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the entire action of respondent No.2 in issuing notice, dated 19.11.2024 and final order, dated 16.12.2024 is in violation of principles of natural justice, also the procedure laid down under the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 and also the principle laid down by this Court in the aforesaid two (2) judgments. Therefore, both the notice, dated 19.11.2024 and final order, dated 16.12.2024 of respondent No.2 are liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside.
12. However, liberty is granted to respondent Nos.2 to 4 to conduct survey afresh by putting the petitioners on notice and affording them an opportunity. Liberty is also granted to respondents to issue fresh notice to the petitioners specifically mentioning the details/ particulars of the un-authorized construction and KL,J W.P.No.100 of 2025 9 deviated portion, granting seven (7) days time to the petitioners to submit explanation, thereafter take action, if any, against the petitioners herein. Respondent No.2 shall complete the aforesaid entire exercise within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
13. Accordingly, this Wirt Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.
__________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J January 03, 2025 gvl