M/S Sri Vinayaka Realtors And ... vs The State Of Telangana
2026 Latest Caselaw 168 Tel

Telangana High Court

M/S Sri Vinayaka Realtors And ... vs The State Of Telangana on 30 March, 2026

     IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                     AT HYDERABAD

     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH
                              AND
             THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN

                    WRIT APPEAL No. 346 of 2026

                          DATED : 30.03.2026

Between:

M/s. Sri Vinayaka Realtors and Developers,
Rep., by its Proprietor, gummadi Sreedhar,
Ongole, A.P. and another.
                                                           ... Appellants
                                  AND

The State of Telangana,
rep., by its Principal Secretary (Municipal Administration),
Secretariat, Hyderabad and another.
                                                         ... Respondents

JUDGMENT:

Heard Mr. P. Rama Sharana Sharma, learned counsel for the

appellants appears through video conferencing and Mr. Krishna Reddy

Putta, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities appears for

respondent No.2.

2. When the matter was taken up on 24.03.2026, the following order

was passed:

"Mr. P.Rama Sharana Sharma, learned counsel appears for the appellants.

Mr. G.Bhaskar, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, appears for respondent No.1.

Mr. Krishna Reddy Putta, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities, appears for respondent No.2.

The matter relates to an intimation letter dated 24.01.2026 by the respondent GHMC directing the appellants, who had got building permission on 24.03.2025 on the subject property, not to carry out any further construction activity in the subject land and maintain complete status quo, pending completion of the survey and demarcation, receipt of final revenue report and passing of reasoned orders by the competent authority on the basis of certain complaints made against the construction activity being carried out by the appellants. The learned writ Court recorded an undertaking on behalf of the appellants that they would not proceed with the construction till the survey is completed. The appellants have preferred this appeal being aggrieved with the impugned direction as appellants have been prevented from carrying out construction within the area over which building permission has been granted.

It appears from perusal of the annexure at Page 38, a letter dated 23.01.2026 issued to the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Medchal-Malkajgiri District by the Deputy Commissioner, Dundigal Circle-59, Quthbullapur Zone, GHMC that the concerned office has been requested to conduct the above joint survey and demarcation and furnish the detailed report along with authenticated sketches as early as possible as the matter is connected with a pending proceeding before this Court. The said office is not a party in the writ petition or appeal.

We have, therefore, asked the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipalities to seek instructions as to the time line within which the survey exercise as per the intimation dated 24.01.2026 would be completed.

He seeks short time to obtain instructions. Let the matter appear on 30.03.2026, as prayed for."

3. Today, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2

Municipality has obtained written instructions. The relevant part which

answers the query raised by this Court is extracted hereunder:

"It is further submitted that the Tahsildar, Gandimaisamma-Dundigal Mandal, vide Lr.No.B/321/2026, dated 28.03.2026, has informed that the Mandal Surveyor was deputed to Collectorate land acquisition work and will resume

duties from 30.03.2026, and accordingly has scheduled the joint survey and demarcation on 31.03.2026. The Tahsildar has also requested this office to deputy concerned officials to attend the survey.

In this regard, it is submitted that necessary steps are being taken to depute the concerned Town Planning staff to attend the joint survey and coordinate with the revenue authorities for verification of ground position and records.

It is submitted that the Municipality has not cancelled the building permission, but has only temporarily restricted further construction activity until completion of the survey and passing of reasoned orders based on the final report."

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 further submits

that time till 10.04.2026 be allowed to conclude the survey. Till then,

the appellants may be directed not to undertake any further construction

activity.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants does not have any objection to

the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for respondent

No.2. He also submits that the survey be directed to be concluded

within a stipulated time. The appellants would not undertake any further

construction activity till conclusion of the survey by 10.04.2026 and also

cooperate in the survey proceedings.

6. In the light of the instructions furnished by learned Standing

Counsel for respondent No.2 and upon hearing the learned counsel for

the parties, the writ appeal is disposed of with an observation that the

joint survey for demarcation of the subject property in relation to the

construction activity being conducted on it should be concluded by

10.04.2026 as per the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel

for respondent No.2. Till such time, the appellants should refrain from

carrying out any further construction activity and cooperate in the

survey proceedings as well. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

__________________________ APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ

__________________________ G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J Date: 30.03.2026 ES