Ghouse Md. Khan vs The State Of Telangana on 15 April, 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
                   HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
             WRIT PETITION No.30747 of 2025
               DATE OF ORDER: 15.04.2026
Between:
Sri. Ghouse MD Khan.

                                                             ...Petitioner
AND
The State of Telangana, Municipal Administration and Urban Development
Department and five others.

                                                        ...Respondents
ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for

MA&UD appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri.Raparthi Venkatesh, learned

standing counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 5. With their

consent, the writ petition is being taken up for disposal.

2. This writ petition has being filed seeking the following prayer:-

"to declare the inaction of the Respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 against Respondent No.6 by not considering the Representation made by the Petitioner before the official Respondents and failing to consider survey report dated 11.09.2025 for immediately demolition of the dilapidated structure at H.No.16-4-440 and 16-4-441, Chachalguda, Hyderabad, and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 to take immediate and necessary action against Respondent No.6 considering Petitioners representation to demolish the said schedule property."

3. Brief facts as stated in this writ petition are that the petitioner claims to be

the owner and possessor of two mulgies/shops, bearing Nos.16-4-440 and 16-4-

441, admeasuring to an extent of 52.77 Sq.yards or equivalent to 43.47 Sq.Meters,

situated at Chanchalguda, Hyderabad, having acquired the same through

registered sale deed bearing document No.439 of 2024 dated 17.01.2024. It is

submitted that the respondent No.6 had illegally occupied the subject property

and the same is in dilapidated condition and may collapse at any time due to

natural calamites. The petitioner on 23.07.2025, made a representation and

requested respondent No.4 to demolish the subject property. Thereafter,

respondent No.3 by observing that the subject property is in dilapidated

condition and may collapse at any time, issued notice under Section 459 of

GHMC Act, 1955 bearing No.440/TPS/ACP/C6/CRZ/GHMC/2024

dated 15.05.2024 and directed the owner/occupier to pull

down/secure/remove/repair the same within (7) days. It is further submitted

that on 01.08.2025 and 08.08.2025, respondent No.3 pasted the notice on the

subject property, however, till date the subject property is not demolished.

Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court on 10.10.2025,

directed the respondent Nos.3 and 5 to pass final orders pursuant to the notice

dated 15.05.2024 and structural stability report vide letter dated 11.09.2025, by

affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondent No.6, in

accordance with law, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt

of a copy of this order, however, till date no final orders are passed. Learned

counsel for the petitioner would pray this Court to direct the respondent Nos.3

and 5 to pass final orders in a time bound period.

5. The learned standing counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2

to 5 submits that in terms of the interim order dated 10.10.2025, the respondent

authorities would pass final orders in accordance with law.

6. For better appreciation, this Court deems it appropriate to refer some of

the relevant Sections of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955

(hereinafter referred to as 'the GHMC Act').

Section 451 of GHMC Act, 1955

"451. Inspection of buildings in course of erection, alteration etc.:- The Commissioner may at any time during the erection or re-erection of a building or the execution of any such work as is described in Section 433 make an inspection thereof without giving previous notice of his intention so to do."

Section 456 of GHMC Act, 1955

"Dangerous Structures

Removal of structures, trees etc., which are in ruins or likely to fall:- (1) If it shall at any time appear to the Commissioner that any structure (including under this expression any building, wall, parapet, pavement, floor, steps, railings, door or window frames or shutters or roof, or other structure and anything affixed to or projection from or resting on, any building, wall, parapet or other structure) is in ruinous condition or likely to fall, or is in any way dangerous to any person occupying, resorting to or passing by, such structure or any other structure or place in the neighbourhood thereof, the Commissioner may, by written notice, require the owner or occupier of such structure to do one or more of the following things, namely:--

(i) to pull down,

(ii) to secure,

(iii) to remove, or

(iv) to repair such structure or thing, and to prevent all cause of danger therefrom.

(2) The Commissioner may also, if he thinks fit, require the said owner or occupier by the said notice, either forthwith or before proceedings to pull down, secure, remove or repair the structure or things, to set up a proper and sufficient hoard or fence for the protection of passers-by and other persons, with a convenient platform and hand-rail, if there be room enough for the same the Commissioner shall think the same desirable, to serve as footway for passengers outside of such hoard or fence.

(3) If it appears to the Commissioner that the danger from a structure which is ruinous or about to fall is imminent, he may, before giving notice as aforesaid or before the period of notice expires, fence off, take down, secure or repair the said structure or take such steps or cause work to be executed as may be required to arrest the danger.

(4) Any expenses incurred by the Commissioner under sub-section (3) shall be paid by the owner or occupier of the structure.

(5) (a) Where the Commissioner is of opinion whether on receipt of an application or otherwise that the only or the most convenient means by which the owner or occupier of structure such as is referred to in sub-

section (1) can pull down, secure, remove or repair such structure, is by entering any of the adjoining premises belonging to some other person the Commissioner after giving such person a reasonable opportunity of stating any objection may, if no such objection is raised or if any objection which is raised appears to him invalid or insufficient, by an order in writing, authorise the said owner or occupier to enter such adjoining premises.

(b) Every such order bearing the signature of the Commissioner shall be a sufficient authority to the person in whose favour it is made, or to any agent or person employed by him for this purpose, after giving to the owner of the premises reasonable written notice of his intention so to do, to enter upon the said premises with assistants and workmen, at any time between sunrise and sun set, and to execute the necessary work.

(c) In executing, any work under this section as little damage as possible shall be done to the adjoining owner's property, and the owner or occupier of premises for the benefit of which the work is done, shall --

(i) cause the work to be executed with the least practicable delay;

(ii) pay compensation to any person who sustains damage by the execution of the said work.

7. On perusal of the above provisions, it is clear that the respondent

authorities are vested with statutory powers to inspect any property and after

putting on notice and after giving fair opportunity of hearing to the concerned

parties, may take appropriate action in accordance with law.

8. Since the provisions of the GHMC Act, 1955 mandates issuance of notice

to the person concerned and the GHMC authorities are empowered to examine

and decide the issue, by issuing notice to the concerned parties, the respondent

authorities are directed to issue notice to the petitioner and respondent No.6.

9. Having considered the above facts and circumstance, recording the

submission made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, without

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and in terms of the interim order

dated 10.10.2025, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.3

and 5 to issue notice to petitioner and respondent No.6 and after giving fair

opportunity of hearing to both the parties, the respondent Nos.3 and 5 in

pursuant to the notice dated 15.05.2024 and structural stability report vide letter

dated 11.09.2025, shall pass final orders strictly in accordance with law, as

expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six (06) weeks, from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the

petitioner. It is made clear that if the allegation made by the petitioner is found

to be true, the respondent authorities shall take appropriate action strictly in

accordance with law.

10. It is clarified that in the event of respondent No.6 is otherwise aggrieved

may avail remedy of filing application for the modification of this order, in

accordance with law.

11. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous

applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

_________________________ N. V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, J Dated: 15.04.2026 Su