K. Chenna Kesava Rao vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 6871 Tel

       HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                   WRIT PETITION No.44892 of 2022

O R D E R:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

"...To issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus and declaring the action of the respondents No 3 and 4 in revoking the building permission of the petitioner vide Revocation letter dated 02-12-2022 Vide Lr No 234343/GH MC/23344/2022 and further insisting upon production of Clearance certificate /no objection certificate from ULC authorities and consider the petitioner application for building permission inspite of orders of this Honble Court dated 28-03-2017 in WP No 21580/2008 and WP No 40134/2022 dated 03-11-2022 as being illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the above said Revocation letter dated 02-12-2022 Vide Lr No 234343/GHMC/23344/2022 issued by 3 and 4 respondents and reconsider the building permission No 234343/GHMC/23344/2022 dated 29-11-2022 of the petitioner in respect of in Plot No 2-B in survey No 60 admeasuring 66 7 Sq yds situated at Plot No 2-B Street/Road Raghavendra Nagar Colony Kondapur Survey No 60 Kondapur Village Serilingampally Circle 20 Serilingampally M GHMC Ranga Reddy District and bounded by North Plot No 3 South Plot No 1 East Road West Plot No 18 without insisting upon production of Clearance Certificate/No objection certificate form ULC authorities and to pass..."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Smt. Thakur Roopa Singh submits

that petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject property and the same

was purchased by way of a registered sale deed on 13.03.2013 and the

petitioner has made an application for construction of a building consisting

of stilt for parking + 2 upper floors on 29.11.2022. She submits that the

respondents have issued a revocation letter on 02.12.2022 giving several

reasons. She submits that the order is bad. Firstly, as the same is passed

without following the principles of natural justice. Secondly, in view of the

several orders passed by this Court, the respondents cannot insist for the

ULC or No Objection from any other department.

3. Learned Standing Counsel Sri. M.A.K. Muqheed for respondent Nos.2,

3 & 4 submits that apart from the ULC, the other issue is that the said land

is not regularized.

4. This Court relying on the judgment in Hyderabad Potteries Pvt. Ltd.

v. Collector, Hyderabad District and another1 has passed several orders

directing the respondents not to insist for NOC from ULC or from any other

department and they have to only look at the primafacie title and possession

of the applicant. In view of the same, this writ petition is disposed of

directing the respondents to process the petitioner's building application

without insisting for NOC from ULC or any other department provided the

petitioner satisfies the other short falls. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 16th December , 2022 myk

1 2001(3) ALD 600