Telangana High Court
Mr. Radhe Shyam Bung vs The State Of Telangana on 5 August, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No. 18088 of 2024
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1, Sri K.Ravinder Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4, Sri B.V.V.S.Murthy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5, and perused the record.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the respondents-authorities are not taking any action pursuant to the complaints lodged by the petitioner, dt.10.05.2024 and dt.06.06.2024, in respect of illegal construction raised in the premises bearing Municipal No.3-2-762 situated at Cement Nala Road, Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, which action it is contended as being illegal and arbitrary.
2
3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.2 to 4, on the other hand, submits that one Smt. N.Anupama and Sri S.Naveen Chandra had obtained building permission, dt.29.01.2020, in respect of the subject premises bearing H.No.3-2-762 for construction of an individual residential building consisting of Stilt + 2 Upper floors; that the respondents- authorities on receiving the complaint/representation from the petitioner have caused verification and found deviation in the setback area; and thus, issued a show-cause notice, dt.29.05.2024.
4. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the authorities thereafter passed a Speaking Order, dt.20.06.2024, wherein it has been noted that the owner/occupier of the subject premises neither submitted any reply to the aforesaid show-cause notice nor stopped the construction work, and thus, directed that the construction made in deviation of the sanctioned plan should be removed within 15 days from the date of receipt 3 of the notice, failing which the owner/occupier was informed that further action would be taken in the matter.
5. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the respondents-authorities thereafter initiated proceedings under Section 461A of the GHMC Act, 1955 and seized the subject premise preventing the owner/occupier of the subject premises to proceed with the further construction.
6. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the authorities would take steps for removal of the construction made in deviation of the sanctioned plan in order to bring the subject construction in conformity with the building permission granted.
7. I have taken note of the respective submissions made.
8. Having regard to the submissions made as above, and since, the respondents-authorities have initiated action, firstly by issuing show-cause notice, dt.29.05.2024, and thereafter by passing a Speaking order, dt.20.06.2024, 4 with regard to the construction being made in the subject premises in deviation of the sanctioned plan, this Court is of the view that the respondents-authorities are to be directed to take further action to bring the construction made in the subject premises in conformity with the building permission granted by the authorities.
9. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
10. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J 05th August, 2024.
gra