WP/35011/2023 of K. Pavan Kumar Vs The State of Telangana on 29 December 2023

ORDER:

ts filed to filed to to [[declare ]]the [[inaction ][of]][[of]]

This Writ Petitionts filed to filed to to [[declare ]]the [[inaction ][of]][[of]]respondent Nos.3 to 5 in taking action on the unauthorizedconstruction of compound wall made in Sy.Nos. 175, 180, 181 and183 of Kollur village, RC Puram, Sangareddy District by6th respondent without any permission or sanction, asillegat,arbitrary, violative of lundamental rights of life and libertyguaranteed under Article 2l of the Constitution of India,consequently direct respondent Nos.3 to 5 to take action onrespondent No.6 and remove the unauthorized compound wallconstructed.

2. l{eard learned counscl for petitioners, learned GovernmentPleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Developmentappearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 3, Sri V.NarasimhaGoud, leamed Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondentNo.2 and Sri B.Jagan Madhav Rao, leamed Standing Counselappearing on behalf of respor.rdent Nos.4 and 5, and perused therecord. With the consent o1' lealned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal atadmission stage.admission stage.

3. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ petition at the admission stage, and the /rs involved in this Writ petition, thisCourt is of the view that notice to unolficial respondent No.6 is notnecessary for adjudication of the present Writ petition.

4. Petitioners contend that they along with others are the ownersof house plots about l32l in number in the land situated inSy.Nos.172, 174, t15, 177,180 to 184, 186 ro 190 (total t4 nos.)situated at Kollur village, R.C. Puram Mandal, Sanga ReddyDistrict, having purchased the same under registered sale deedsfrom its lawful owners and pattedars in the year 1984; that on3l-07 -2023, when the petitioners visited their plots, it was noticedthat the unofficial respondent along with his henchmen areconstructing a compound wall on the land wherein the petitioners'plots are situated; that on enquiries, it was revealed that the saidconstruction is being made without any permission or sanction; andthat the petitioners immediately approached respondent Nos.2 to 4and lodged a complainUrepresentarion dated l6-0g_2023(submitted on 17 -08-2023).

5. Petitioners fufther contend that on [the aforesaid representation]being submitted to the 2nd respondent authority, [the ][said ][authority]had addressed a letter dated 31-08-2023 to the [4'h ][respondent]calling upon the said respondent to take action [against ][the ][illegal]encroachment and unauthorized construction and [report]compliance within I5 days.

6. Petitioners further contend that not [only ]l5 [days ][as ][mentioned]by the 2nd respondent in the letter dated 31-08-2023 [is over, ][even]after more than 3 months, no action is taken [by ][the ][4th ][respondent]against the said unauthorized and illegal construction [of ][compound]wall made by the unofficial respondent.

7. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf [of ][respondent]Nos.4 and 5, while admitting to the fact of [the ][2nd ][respondent]addressing communication dated [3l-08-2023 to ][the ][4th ][respondent]calling upon the said respondent to look into the [contents ]of [the]representation and take action, would however, fairly submits thatthe said communication addressed by the 2'd respondent did [not]receive due attention and if this Curt were to show indulgence, theauthorities woutd look into the [same ]and take further action [on ][the]unauthorized and illegal [construction ]being made by [the]6th respondent.

II

8. Having regard to the subrrissions made as above and takingnote of the fact that the 2nd respondent had addressed a letter dated31-08-2023 directing the 4th respondent to rake necessary actionagainst the illegal encroachment and unauthorized constructionbeing made in the land in Sy.Nos.172,174, 175, l77,lBO to 184,186 to 190 situated at Kollur village, R.C. puram Mandal, SangaReddy District vide letter dated 31-08-2023, this Court is of theview that the 4th respondent authority should be directed to takefurther action on the aforesaid communication within a period oftwo (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order byfollowing due process of law.

9. Subject to the above observations and directions, the WritPetition is disposed of. No costs.

10. It is made clear that this Court has not expresscd any opinionon the merits of the matter.

I 1 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand closed.

SD/. K. AMMAJ]ASSISTANT RESTRAR//TRUE COPY//SECTIONFFICER

To1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban DevelopmentDepartment, Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban DevelopmentDepartment, Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.2. The Metropolitan Commissioner, Hyderabad lVletropolitan Urban DevelopmentAuthority, (Planning Department), Swarnaiayanthi Commercial Complex, 4thFloor, West Wing, Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500038.Authority, (Planning Department), Swarnaiayanthi Commercial Complex, 4thFloor, West Wing, Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500038.3. The Director Commissioner and Director of Municipal AdministrationDepartment, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500004.Department, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500004.

IIIiIt,lr

HIGH COURT

DATED:2911212023

ORDERWP.No.35011 [of ][2023]

DISPOSING [OF ][THE ][W.P]

WITHOUT COSTS.

)A

{[gE]g-f ATEOA(-eJIt [1t1\ ]i"Bo$oIncr:r.ri{