Syed Ifteqar vs Sajida Shaheen
2023 Latest Caselaw 976 Tel

         THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                       AND
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


                   WRIT APPEAL No.238 of 2023

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


       Heard       Mr.     Mohammed            Rahail        Ahmed,   learned

counsel for the appellants; Mr. Pasham Krishna Reddy,

learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration

and      Urban        Development            Department         representing

respondent No.3; and Mr. M.Durga Prasad, learned

Standing Counsel for respondents No.4, 5, 6 and 7.

2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated

20.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing

of W.P.No.35496 of 2022 filed by respondents No.1 and 2

as the writ petitioners.

3. Respondents No.1 and 2 had filed the related writ

petition assailing the inaction of respondents No.3 to 7 in

demolishing illegal construction of the appellants in

property bearing H.Nos.11-21-17 and 11-21-17/1, PTIN

No.1031101822 and 1031103919 situated at N.T.R Nagar,

Road No.1, L.B.Nagar, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District (referred to as 'the subject property' hereinafter)

and further sought a direction to the said respondents to

forthwith demolish the illegal construction.

4. In the course of the hearing before the learned Single

Judge, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad

Municipal Corporation (GHMC) submitted that the GHMC

had issued notices to the appellants on 25.04.2022 and

05.05.2022 under Section 452 of the Greater Hyderabad

Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (briefly, 'the GHMC Act'

hereinafter). He had also submitted before the learned

Single Judge that the GHMC would take further steps in

accordance with law within a period of two weeks.

5. Recording the submissions of learned Standing

Counsel for GHMC, learned Single Judge disposed of the

writ petition by directing the GHMC to take further steps in

accordance with law within a period of two weeks.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

though appellants were arrayed as respondent Nos.7 and 8

in the writ proceedings, no notice was issued to them by

the learned Single Judge. Consequently, they had no

opportunity to defend themselves before the learned Single

Judge.

7. Learned Standing Counsel for GHMC submits that

against the notices issued by the GHMC under Section 452

of the GHMC Act and subsequent notices, appellants have

already instituted W.P.No.41331 of 2022 before this Court

which is pending, but there is no stay. On the other hand,

appellant No.2, namely, Md. Tayyab Khan, and another

have filed W.A.No.63 of 2023 against the same order dated

20.09.2022. The factum of filing the said writ appeal by

appellant No.2 has not been disclosed in the memo of the

present appeal.

8. Be that as it may, having regard to the order passed

by the learned Single Judge, we are of the view that the

GHMC while acting on the impugned notices shall give due

opportunity of hearing to the appellants and thereafter

proceed in accordance with law. Therefore and in the

circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the

finding rendered by the learned Single Judge.

9. Writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

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

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

______________________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 27.02.2023 vs