Dr.Farhana Zaman vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 3149 Tel

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3149 Tel
Judgement Date : 1 November, 2021

Telangana High Court

Dr.Farhana Zaman vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others on 1 November, 2021

Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, A.Rajasheker Reddy

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                    AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY



                  WRIT APPEAL No.577 of 2021


JUDGMENT:    (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)


       The appellant before this Court has filed the present

writ   appeal     being       aggrieved         by     the     order     dated

25.10.2021 passed in W.P.No.13376 of 2021.

       The contention of the appellant is that she has

preferred the writ petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India being aggrieved by the threat of

demolition of a hospital in the premises bearing No.16-2-

145/F admeasuring 472 square yards situated at Judges

Colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad.                     She has stated that

during the pendency of the writ petition, an interim order

was issued directing the Greater Hyderabad Municipal

Corporation (GHMC) to ensure that the parking area in

which there is unauthorised construction is restored as

parking area and the same was done by restoring it as

parking area.

       Learned counsel for the appellant has argued before

this Court that in the writ petition a prayer was made for

regularising the unauthorised construction on various

grounds. However, the learned Single Judge has passed

the interim order on 25.10.2021 directing the GHMC to
                               2




demolish the two upper floors, pent house in the 6th floor

and one room on the 7th floor and to report compliance

on 02.11.2021. She has argued before this Court that by

directing demolition of the building, virtually a final order

has been passed by the learned Single Judge, though it is

an interim order, and the grounds raised by the appellant

have not been considered and decided on merits.          She

has stated that in case the building is demolished, the

entire writ petition will become infructuous.

     On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for

the GHMC has argued before this Court that the

construction is illegal. However, no final order has been

passed by the learned Single Judge deciding the writ

petition on merits. He has also stated that the GHMC is

taking action as per the orders passed by the learned

Single Judge from time to time.

     Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 has stated

that he does not have any instructions in the matter.

In the considered opinion of this Court, once the

building is demolished, there remains nothing to be

adjudicated by the learned Single Judge as to whether

the construction is illegal, whether compounding can be

done or not and whether the grounds raised by the

appellant entitles her for grant of any relief or not.

Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the

matter deserves to be heard on merits.

Resultantly, the writ appeal is allowed and the order

passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside. The

parties are directed to appear before the learned Single