G. Kondamma vs G. Rajasekhar
2022 Latest Caselaw 4861 Tel

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                          AND
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

          Writ Appeal Nos.575 and 605 of 2022

COMMON JUDGMENT:        (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy)



     This order will dispose of both writ appeal Nos.575

and 605 of 2022. For the sake of convenience, the parties

are referred to as arrayed in W.A.No.605 of 2022.

2.   Both the writ appeals arise out of the interlocutory

order dated 30.08.2022 passed in W.P.No.25632 of 2022,

whereby and whereunder the learned Single Judge directed

appearance of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, West

Zone, Hyderabad, before the Court on 01.09.2022. While

writ appeal No.575 of 2022 is preferred by the third

parties, writ appeal No.605 of 2022 is preferred by

respondent No.6 in W.P.No.25632 of 2022.

3. We have heard Mr. Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned

counsel for the appellants in W.A.No.575 of 2022;

Mr. B.G. Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant

in W.A.No.605 of 2022; Mr. Vedula Venkataramana,

learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners;

and Mr. N. Ashok Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the

Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC).

4. The related writ petition i.e., W.P.No.25632 of 2022

was filed by the respondent Nos.7 to 23 herein. The case of

respondent Nos.7 to 23 herein before the learned Single

Judge is that they are the residents of Gudimalkapur Area.

On the basis of a licence obtained in the name of

one Ms. Tadakara Geetasri, M/s. Vaishnavi Wines

(appellant in W.A.No.605 of 2022) is running a Wine Shop

in premises bearing H.No.13-6-438/2/9, Opp: Pillar No.86,

PVNR Flyover, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad, based on a lease

deed obtained from persons who are not the owners of the

property. The said persons have made totally illegal and

unauthorised constructions without any construction

permission from the GHMC and thereafter executed a

registered lease deed in favour of Tadakara Geetasri. While

so, respondent No.9 herein (petitioner No.3 in

W.P.No.25632 of 2022) filed W.P.No.31764 of 2021 which

was disposed of directing demolition of the said premises,

as it is totally unauthorised and illegal. Pursuant thereto,

the GHMC had conducted proceedings and demolished the

illegal structures on 16.05.2022. Immediately thereafter,

appellant in W.A.No.605 of 2022 with the help of the

subordinate officers of the GHMC started operating the

Wines Shop and Permit Room in the open land of the

premises thereby creating nuisance and disturbance of the

peace of the locality. Therefore, they made representations

to respondent Nos.2 to 5 in the writ petition requesting

them to take immediate steps to shift the Wine Shop and

Permit Room from the said premises to any other premises.

Since there was no response, they were constrained to file

the writ petition.

5. The learned Single Judge passed the interim order

dated 30.08.2022 which reads as follows:-

"Despite this Court directing the respondent-police authorities to provide sufficient Police bandobast for demolition to be undertaken by the Deputy Commissioner, Circle-13, Karwan, K.2., GHMC, Hyderabad, it is stated to this Court that the respondent-police authorities have stated to have addressed a letter dt.24-08-2022 expressing their inability to provide police bandobast on 25-08-2022 at 11.00 hours for the respondent- GHMC authorities to proceed with the demolition. The said letter is issued under the signature of Inspector of Police, Tappachabutra P.S. while the letter was addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, West Zone, Hlyderabad. Since the said action on the part of respondent-police authorities appears to be in disobedience of the orders of this Court, the

Deputy Commissioner of Police, West Zone, Hyderabad is directed to appear before this Court on 01.09.2022 List on 01-09-2022."

6. Challenging the said interim order, respondent No.6

in W.P.No.25632 of 2022 i.e., M/s. Vaishnavi Wines, filed

W.A.No.605 of 2022, whereas third parties to the writ

petition, claiming to be the owners of the subject property,

filed W.A.No.575 of 2022.

7. Mr. Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the

appellants in W.A.No.575 of 2022, submits that the

appellants are the absolute owners and possessors of part

of premises bearing Municipal No.13-6-438/2/9,

comprising of two shops and open land, total area

admeasuring 161.00 square yards or 135.24 square

meters, situated at Jafferguda, Hyderabad, Telangana

State, having succeeded to the said property after the

demise of their father Sri E.Balaiah S/o. Late Rajaiah, who

originally purchased the said property by way of a

registered Sale Deed vide document No.1324 of 1994 dated

07.04.1994; on request made by the appellant in

W.A.No.605 of 2022 (petitioner No.6 in W.P.No.25632 of

2022), the said property was leased out to them vide

registered Rental Deed bearing document No.6932 of 2021

dated 18.12.2021 on a monthly rent of Rs.1,20,000/-

excluding electricity charges; and since their rights are

involved in the subject property, they are necessary parties

to the writ petition.

8. Sri Vedula Venkata Rama, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for the writ petitioners in W.P.No.25632 of 2022,

would submit that respondent Nos.7 to 23 herein/writ

petitioners are the residents of the locality; the leased

premises was constructed without obtaining the

permission from the GHMC; respondent No.9 herein

(petitioner No.3 in W.P.No.25632 of 2022) filed

W.P.No.31764 of 2021 which was disposed of by order

dated 12.04.2022 directing demolition of the unauthorised

constructions; pursuant to the said orders, GHMC had

conducted proceedings and demolished the illegal

structures on 16.05.2022; appellant herein (respondent

No.6) in W.P.No.25632 of 2022 with the help of the

subordinate officers of the GHMC started operating the

Wines Shop and Permit Room in the open land of the

premises, thereby creating nuisance and disturbance of the

peace of the locality; since it was brought to the notice of

the learned Single Judge that even though orders were

passed by this court, the respondents were not taking any

action and a direction was sought to provide police aid to

carry out demolition of illegal construction wherein the

wine shop is being run, learned Single Judge has rightly

passed the impugned order and the same does not warrant

any interference.

9. Admittedly, W.P.No.25632 of 2022 has been

instituted seeking implementation of the directions issued

by this Court in W.P.No.31764 of 2021, wherein the

learned Single Judge duly taking note of the inability of the

GHMC officials to carry out the said directions, has issued

direction to the police to provide necessary police aid to

implement the orders passed by this Court. By the

impugned order, the learned Single Judge, on finding

disobedience on the part of the respondent police

authorities to provide sufficient police bandobast for

demolition to be undertaken by the Deputy Commissioner,

Circle-13, Karwan, K.Z., GHMC, Hyderabad, directed the

Deputy Commissioner of Police, West Zone, Hyderabad to

appear before the Court on 01.09.2022.

10. This Court on 03.09.2022 while granting stay of the

order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the learned Single

Judge, directed to maintain status quo in all respects as

regards the disputed structure till 08.09.2022 and

thereafter the interim order has been extended from time to

time.

11. Since the unauthorised construction destroys the

concept of planned development, it is imperative for the

public authority to demolish such constructions, which are

raised in flagrant violation of the building regulations and

municipal laws and since appellant in W.A.No.605 of 2022

(respondent No.6 in W.P.No.25632 of 2022) is running a

wine shop and causing inconvenience to the inhabitants of

the locality, we are of the opinion that the order passed by

the learned Single Judge does not warrant any interference

by this Court in the intra court appeals.

12. Accordingly, both the writ appeals are dismissed

leaving it open to the parties to raise all objections and

contentions in the pending writ petition. It is clarified that

the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed

as findings on merits of the matter and the writ petition

shall be decided on its own merits.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 23.09.2022 JSU