WP/32832/2011 of B.Lingaiah Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep.by on 29 December 2011

ORDER :

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ ofmandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3in not disposing of the petitioner’s representation dated8.11.2011 requesting to take steps for demolition of illegalconstruction of the respondents 4 to 6 in House bearingNo.SRT 356 & 357 (H.No.1-1-379/254 to 247) situated inJawahar Nagar, Opp. Geetanjali Public School, BehindBalaji Tiffin Center, Chikkadapally, Hyderabad as illegaland arbitrary.

2. The facts, in brief, stated in the affidavit filed insupport of the Writ Petition may be stated as follows.

Petitioner is resident of House bearing No. SRT 377,Street No.8, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad and therespondents 4 and 5 are owners of landed propertybearing H.No.1-1-379/247, SRT 356, Jawahar Nagar,Hyderabad. House of the said respondents 4 and 5 is ateastern side of petitioner’s house and the said land alongwith constructed house was purchased by therespondents from one Smt. D.Damayanthi, on 31.3.2006. Thereafter, respondents 4 to 6 illegally constructed abuilding consisting of Cellar+5 floors without followingmunicipal bye-laws and rules and building regulations withthe active connivance with the officials of first respondentcorporation and violating the provisions of the GreaterHyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and thebuilding Rules made thereunder, without leaving properspace for parking.

As the respondents 4 to 6 did not heed to therequest of the petitioner, he approached the respondentcorporation officials raising objections and applied underthe Right to Information Act, 2005, to which he received reply on 06.09.2011 clearly stating that no records areavailable in the office pertaining to the said address. Therespondents 4 to 6 neither applied for permission from theGHMC nor got permission from the said authority. Thepetitioner gave several representations. The sixthrespondent, under pressure, made him to withdrawrepresentations dated 09.08.2011 and 09.09.2011, butthe representation dated 08.11.2011 is pending. Thebuilding consisting of cellar + 5 floors was constructed ona slanting position, and on account of the same, it hasbecome very difficult for the flat owners of the building inparking their vehicles and so the vehicles are beingparked on road leading to the house of petitioner andblocking the entire road. There is a school exactlyopposite to the building of the respondents 4 to 6 and it iscausing inconvenience to the children of the school inmoving out from the school. The authorities failed to takeaction inspite of representations of the petitioner. Hence,the Writ Petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned standing counsel for the respondents 1 to 3.4. The grievance of the petitioner is that therespondents 4 to 6 constructed the building in questionwith cellar + 5 upper floors without following the rules andregulations. Whether the respondents 4 to 6 constructedthe building in question without following buildingregulations or not, has to be decided by the respondents1 to 3. Therefore, the respondents-authorities are directedto verify the constructions made by the respondents 4 to 6in the building in question and take appropriate actionfollowing due process of law after giving notice to therespondents 4 to 6 in case the building in constructedwithout sanctioned plan or constructions are madedeviating from the sanctioned plan.

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

---------------------

29.12.2011 (K.C.Bhanu, J.)

DRK

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

WRIT PETITION No. 32832 OF 2011

29.12.2011