Telangana High Court
E. Ravindranath, vs The Principal Secretary on 22 July, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.19242 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban
Development appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri
S.Abhay Kumar Sagar, learned Standing Counsel appearing on
behalf of respondent No.2, and perused the record. With the
consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ
Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal.
2. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at
the admission stage and the lis involved in this Writ Petition, this
Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondents is not
necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the unofficial
respondents are making construction without having any valid
permission from the respondent authorities; that the petitioner
approached the respondent authorities and lodged complaint; and
that though the 2nd respondent authority had passed a speaking
order on 21-03-2024, no steps are being taken to enforce the
aforesaid speaking order, which action of the respondent
authorities, it is contended as highly illegal and arbitrary.
4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of
2nd respondent has placed before this Court the written instructions
under the signature of the Commissioner.
5. By the said written instructions, it is stated that on the
respondent authorities passing the speaking order dated 21-03-2024
directing the respondent No.4 and 8 others to remove the
unauthorized construction within 15 days, the unofficial
respondents in the present Writ Petition have approached the Court
of civil jurisdiction and filed suit vide O.S.No.43 of 2024 and
obtained an order of injunction vide I.A.No.102 of 2024 on
14-06-024.
6. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that on the
concerned Court of civil jurisdiction passing the injunction order in
the suit filed by the unofficial respondent herein, the respondent
authorities have filed a counter-affidavit in the matter and the said
suit is pending adjudication.
7. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that on the Court of
civil jurisdiction vacating/dismissing the interim order granted, the
authorities would take further steps for enforcing the speaking
order dated 21-03-2024.
8. On the aforesaid submission being made by the learned
Standing Counsel, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner would also take steps to seek impleadment in the
aforesaid pending proceedings before the Court of civil
jurisdiction.
9. Having regard to the submissions made as above, since the
2nd respondent had already initiated action against the unauthorized
and illegal construction made by the unofficial respondents by
passing a speaking order dated 21-03-2024, against which a suit
vide O.S.No.43 of 2024 has been filed before the IV Additional
District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar,
this Court is of the view that the respondent authorities as well as
the petitioner, who had stated that he would also take steps to
implead himself in the aforesaid pending proceedings, are to be
directed to bring to the notice of the concerned Court of civil
jurisdiction the judgment of this Court in Municipal Corporation
of Hyderabad Vs. Philomena Education Foundation of India1
2008(2) ALD 1
and the Circulars issued by the High Court in the year 2017,
reiterated on 08-11-2023 enabling the Court of civil jurisdiction to
take further action in the matter.
10. Subject to above observations and directions, this Writ
Petition is disposed of. No costs.
11. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand
closed.
___________________
T. VINOD KUMAR, J
Date: 22.07.2024
Vsv
