WP/12874/2012 of SMT.LAXMI BAI, S.R.NAGAR,HYDERABAD AND ANOTHER Vs THE COMMISSIONER,GHMC,HYDERABAD AND 2 OTHERS on 24 December 2025

13485I

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 12874 oF 2012

Between:

'1 . Smt.Laxmi Bai, W/o.Late Puran Singh, Aged:58 years, Occ: Service

2. Savitri Rani @ Savitri Bai, D/o.Late Puran Singh, Aged:35 years, Occ:Service Both R/o.7-1-63211 59, Bapunagar S.R. Nagar, Hyderabad

...PETITIONERS

AND

2.

3.

The Commissioner,GHMC, Hyderabad

The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC Khairatabad, Hyderabad Jadav Shankar Naik, S/o.J.Sakro Naik Business e/o.7-1-6321122, Bapunagar, S.R.Nagar Hyderabad

...RESPONDENTS

. Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to grant writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction in the nature of the writ declaring the construction of the Respondent No.3 over the premises bearing No.7-1-6321159, Bapunagar, S.R.Nagar, Hyderabad as being illegal, contrary to law and violative of the Articles, 14 of the Constitution of lndia directing the Respondent No.1 and 2 to take action 4s per Iaw, against the illegal, construction raised by the Respondent No.3.

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 16089 OF 20121

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 not to occupy the said pr.i,ire, bearing No.7_1_

6321159 Bapunagar, SR Nagar, Hyderabad.

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

Between:

Smt.Laxrni Bai, W/o Late puran Singh, Aged:5g year:; Occ Retired Savitri Rani @ Savitri Bai, D/o.Late puran Singh, Ag: i 35 years, Occ:House Wife, Both Rl/o.7-1 -63211 59, Bapunagar S.R.Nagar, Hyderatr; d

...PETITIONERS

AND

3.

The Commissioner,GHMC,Hyderabad

The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC Khairatabad, Hydrrr rbad Jadav Shankar Naik, S/o.J.Sakro Naik Business No.1 t_632t122, Bapunagar, S.R.Nagar Hyderabad !2t,ry,r-11a1.can, oo,o"",u, ,X,=^t-::J'"t:l:,'^:"":1, [::"i"^:l].:1":"'

R/o. Himayathnagar, Hyderabad

...RESPONDENT No.4/pROpOSt: ) RESpONDENT NO.4

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the r rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High cc r t may be preased to permit the petitioner herein to impread the receiver of th€ )roperty, Smt. Manjari Ganu, Advocate, as respondent no. 4 in the above Wri )etitton No. 12g24 of

2012.

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K.SRI DEVI

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 &2: SRI M.ARUN KUM \R, SC FOR GHMC

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: - - -

The Court made the following: ORDER

!

i

I

t

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

Betrveen:

Smt Laxmi Bai and another

W.P.No. L2a74 of 2012

Dt.24.L o.2025

And

.... Petittoners

. . ResPondents

The Commissioner, GHMC' HYderabad

ald two others'

OR DER:

HeardlearnedcounselforthepetitionerandSriMiddeArun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents- GHMC, and Perused the record'

2.

The instant Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the construction of the 3'd respondent over the Premtses bearing No. 7 -l-6321 159' Bapunagar' SR Nagar, Hyderabad, as being iUegal' contrary to law and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to direct respondents No' 1 & 2

to take action against the illegal construction raised by the 3'd respondent, in accordance with larv '

3.

Though the main contention of the lcr rned counsel for petitioner is Lhat the second appeal filed by he r belore this Court in respect ol the disputed propertv, ulde SA tr t.949 of 2002, is pcnding ad-jrrdication, it appears that the ;aic1 appeal was dismissed on 08.09.20 1O.

4.

Initiallr,.

on 20.06.2012, when the mat.er came up for hearing on 'admission,, this Court observed as I r rder:

"Learned Standing Counsel for Greate t Hgd.erabad Municipal Corporation appeaing for respat (,.ents I and. 2

submits that the 3d respond.ent is con; ructing RCC

building consisting of Ground. + six upper .,t.oors without obtaining ualid perrnission from Greato Hgd_erabad.

Municipat corporation, and as such, the 2.,t re,spond_ent rssued notice und-er Section 452(1) 5 46 (1) of Hgderabad Municipal Corporation Ac, I9SS on 12.06.2012 to the 3,a respond.ent, and. pur s ,lant thereto, further steps will be taken."

5.

Since, thc main prayer of the writ petitiorr is to declare the construction made by the 3.d respondent in thc sulrject property as iliegal and unauthorized construction ar r I to direct the respondents No. I and 2 to take action there_ail rinst, and since, the iearned Standing Counsel appearing for resp< ndents No. i & 2

has asserted before this Court on 20.06.2012 as well today, that a:; w

the

respondents- authoritie s

would

take aPProPriate stePs

the 3d resPondent on

pursuant to the

12.06.2012, the

notice issued to

Writ Petitron ts disPosed of directing the respondents No'1 & 2 to take appropriate steps against the illegal construction aileged to havc been made by thc 3"r respondent in the a-forementioned property' in accordance rvith law'

espondentsNo1&2sha1l

ving notice aJresh' to all the

al resPondent No 3 and also

cases, if anY, between the

petitioner and the unofficial respondent No order as to costs As a sequel thereto' mrscellaneous petitions' if any' pending 6 .

Needless to mention that the r

follon, due process of law' besides ser

aJfected parties including the unoffici

keeping in view the Pending civii

shall stand c!q9e-d

/ITRUE COPYII

^?gi3ff;-1t'[B?[Xf;

z

l-'/

SECTION OFFICER

E

i

To,

1.

2.

3.

5.

PMK

The commissioner'crtMC'@llri,utruro, Hyderabad The DePutY Commissioner'

C

;;; ;.-' K SRr DEVr'. Advo,"3[

l"#}nn" r'""

One CC to SRI M'ARUN KU

Two CD Copies

I1

\

w

HIGH COURT

DATED:2411212025

oo

>t

*