Tippani Ashok Reddy vs The State Of Telangana And 7 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 3529 Tel

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3529 Tel
Judgement Date : 7 July, 2022

Telangana High Court

Tippani Ashok Reddy vs The State Of Telangana And 7 Others on 7 July, 2022

Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, Surepalli Nanda

        THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                         AND
          THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA


                 WRIT APPEAL No.423 of 2022

JUDGMENT:       (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)



        Heard Ms. B. Rachna Reddy, learned counsel for the

appellant.


2.      This intra-court appeal has been preferred assailing

the legality and validity of the final order dated 21.03.2022

passed     by     the      learned         Single         Judge     disposing   of

W.P.No.1802 of 2021 filed by the appellant.


3.      From the materials on record, we find that the related

writ petition was filed by the appellant questioning the

action of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

(briefly, 'the Corporation' hereinafter) in constructing a

compound wall allegedly into the land of the appellant. It

was alleged that under the guise of and claiming as open

space     on    the     basis       of     revised         layout   plan,   illegal

construction was being made by the Corporation.
                                  2




4.   Corporation had filed counter contesting the claim of

the appellant. Contrary to the assertion of the appellant, it

was contended that it was the appellant who was trying to

grab public property of layout plan space.               In order to

protect the same, Corporation was constructing the

compound wall. Because of threat given by the appellant,

complaint was lodged by the Corporation whereafter the

jurisdictional Metropolitan Magistrate had granted stay of

all further proceedings.


5.   On due consideration, learned Single Judge disposed

of the writ petition in the following manner:


     "5.   Having heard the learned counsel on either side,
     perused the record. The contention of the respondents is

that it is the revised layout. However, the contention of the petitioner is that the GHMC has encroached upon his land and constructing a compound wall. It is the case of GHMC that they are constructing a compound wall in the open space and the petitioner has no locus to question the same. Now, the disputed fact is whether the GHMC has constructed a compound wall in the land belonging to the petitioner. Unless and until a survey is conducted demarcating the boundaries, it cannot be decided whether the compound wall is constructed by the GHMC in the land belonging to the petitioner.

6. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application seeking survey of the said land and basing on the said report, the respondents are at liberty to take steps in accordance with law. Till such time, the respondents shall not carry any constructions in the property of the petitioner. No order as to costs."

6. According to learned counsel for the appellant,

existence of any revised layout itself is doubtful. Further,

it was contended that Telangana Housing Board had gifted

the subject land to the Corporation, which is also

contentious.

7. We feel that contentions raised by the appellant

borders on highly disputed questions of fact which we are

not inclined to enter into. In the circumstances, learned

Single Judge was justified in granting liberty to the

appellant to make an appropriate application before the

competent authority for survey of the said land and based

on the said report, liberty has been granted to the