Telangana High Court
Nagula Venugopal vs The State Of Telangana on 14 June, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.423 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Housing, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri K.Prabhakara Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of 2nd respondent, and perused the record.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner and his two brothers had succeeded to the house property owned by their mother bearing D.No.2-2-17 (Old H.No.3-42), situated at Ramagundam, Ramagundam Municipal Corporation, Peddapalli District; that the aforesaid property consisted of Mangalore Tiled roof house purchased by petitioner's mother under registered sale deed dated 08-06-1981; and that the said property was also mutated in petitioner mother's name in the record of 2nd respondent authority and was being subjected to assessment of property tax. 2
3. Petitioner further contends that since the house purchased by the petitioner's mother consisted of Manglore Tiled roof building along with its appurtenant land in a plot admeasuring 704 sq. yards on the demise of their mother, the petitioner along with his two brothers have partitioned the same among themselves under a registered partition deed with each one of the brother getting land to an extent of 234.66 sq. yards.
4. Petitioner further contends that while out of the existing dilapidated house along with appurtenant land that had fallen to petitioner's brothers, who have demolished the same, the open land to an extent of 234.66 square yards had fallen to the share of the petitioner.
5. Petitioner further contends that since petitioner's brothers had demolished the old house and intended to construct a new house in the land to an extent of 234.66 sq. yards each falling to their share, the petitioner also intended to undertake construction of a house in the land that has fallen to his share, along with his two brothers, and accordingly, all the three brothers had 3 approached the 2nd respondent authority and submitted separate application for grant of building permission on 05-12-2022.
6. Petitioner further contends that the 2nd respondent authority, by considering the applications made, had issued permission and on the basis of the aforesaid permission, the petitioner and his two brothers have commenced work.
7. Petitioner further contends that while they were proceeding with the construction, the 2nd respondent had issued notice dated 07-12-2022 for revocation of building permission granted on the ground that the registered document submitted for obtaining permission is executed after the cutoff date i.e. 26-08-2020.
8. Petitioner further contends that aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the 2nd respondent authority in revoking the building permission granted in favour of the petitioner and his two brothers, the petitioner along with his two brothers had filed a Writ Petition before this Court vide W.P. No.483 of 2023, and this Court by order dated 09-01-2023, had set aside the revocation orders issued, since the same was passed without issuing any notice to the petitioners therein, and directed the 4 respondents to issue shortfall letter, if any after considering the documents submitted by the petitioners and take appropriate decision thereon and pass appropriate orders and communicate its decision to the petitioners immediately thereafter.
9. Petitioner further contends that upon this Court passing the aforesaid order in W.P. No.483 of 2023, the 2nd respondent had issued shortfall notice dated 18-01-2023 stating therein that in the TS-bPASS system, earlier there was no option to call for shortfall documents and for the said reason permission was revoked without raising shortfall/show cause notice. By the shortfall notice issued, it is further stated that since in the TS- bPASS system, the option for issuance of shortfall/show cause notice has been enabled recently, the aforesaid notice is being issued and petitioner and his two brothers were directed to submit explanation in writing within 7 days from the date of receipt of said notice as to why the building permission obtained by the petitioner and his two brothers, should not be revoked since the same has been obtained by material misrepresentation and suppression of fact.
5
10. Petitioner further contends that though the shortfall notice issued had alleged that petitioner and his two brothers having made material misrepresentation and suppression of fact while obtaining building permission, the said shortfall notice issued however, did not mention as to what is the material misrepresentation or suppression of fact resorted to by the petitioner and his two brothers while obtaining building permission.
11. Petitioner further contends that on the aforesaid show cause notice being issued, the elder brother of petitioner viz., petitioner No.1 in W.P. No.483 of 2021 had submitted his explanation thereto on the following day i.e. on 19-01-2023 and no orders were passed thereon till date.
12. Petitioner further contends that as the things stood thus, the 2nd respondent had issued intimation letter dated 30-01-2023 stating that the building permission application of the petitioner and his two brothers is being considered as per the Court orders in W.P. No.483 of 2023 dated 09-01-2023 as per building Rules by duly collecting the Land Regularization Scheme (LRS) fee in 6 respect of old dismantled property bearing House No.2-2-17 (Old H.No.3-42), situated at Ramagundam, Ramagundam Municipal Corporation, Peddapalli District.
13. Petitioner further contends that the 2nd respondent authority, within a gap of two days thereafter i.e. on 02-02-2023, had issued another intimation letter titled as "Revised Fee Intimation Letter" demanding the petitioner and his two brothers to remit a sum of Rs.1,68,535/- as against the original amount of Rs.2,12,877.73 Ps towards fee and charges for the authorities to consider the building permission applications submitted by the petitioner and his two brothers.
14. Petitioner further contends that his elder brother, who was arrayed as petitioner No.1 in W.P. No.483 of 2023, had called in question the aforesaid communications dated 30-01-2023 and 02-02-2023 issued by the 2nd respondent before this Court by filing W.P. No.4948 of 2023.
15. Petitioner further contends that this Court by order dated 07-12-2023 passed in the above mentioned Writ Petition had set aside the intimation notices dated 30-01-2023 and the Revised 7 Fee Intimation Letter dated 02-02-2023 issued by the 2nd respondent in respect of petitioner's elder brother and remitted the matter back to the 2nd respondent authority to pass orders afresh in accordance with law.
16. Petitioner further contends that he is also similarly placed like the 1st petitioner in W.P. No.4948 of 2023 having been issued with intimation letter dated 30-01-2023 and Revised Fee Intimation letter dated 02-02-2023 whereunder a sum of Rs.1,68,535/- was demanded towards charges under LRS in respect of the land admeasuring 234.66 sq. yards forming part of dismantled property bearing House Number 2-2-17 (Old House No.3-42) situated at Ramagundem village, Ramagundam Municipal Corporation, Peddapally District, which formed part and parcel of the building owned by petitioner's mother, and seeks for grant of similar relief/direction as issued in W.P. No.4948 of 22023.
17. Counter-affidavit on behalf of 2nd respondent is filed.
18. By the counter-affidavit deposed to by 2nd respondent, it is contended that the petitioner and his two brothers without 8 obtaining building permission have constructed RCC building in the subject land under the guise of the orders passed by this Court in various Writ Petitions.
19. By the counter-affidavit, the 2nd respondent would further contend that since the petitioner and his family members were making construction without obtaining any permission from the respondents, the 2nd respondent authority had issued notices to the petitioner and his two brothers to stop illegal construction; and since, the petitioner and his two brothers did not yield to the notices issued by the 2nd respondent and high handedly constructing the residential building, the authorities have issued notice dated 03-11-2023 and final notice dated 05-12-2023 to the petitioner and his two brothers to remove the illegal construction within 7 days and further directed to stop the work forthwith under Section 174(4) and 178(2) of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019.
20. The 2nd respondent, by the counter-affidavit, would further contend that the petitioner, without answering the notice dated 05-12-2023, is proceeding with the further illegal construction 9 and that the 2nd respondent by following the due process of law and after giving reasonable opportunity and considering the reply submitted by the petitioner dated 09-01-2024, had passed the speaking order dated 17-01-2024 rejecting the reply filed by the petitioner.
21. The 2nd respondent, by the counter-affidavit filed, would further contend that the petitioner had already completed the construction of RCC ground floor building unauthorisedly without taking permission from the competent authority, which action of the petitioner is against the Building Rules and that the 2nd respondent authority is proceeding to take further action as per law for demolition of the illegal construction being made by the petitioner.
22. By the counter-affidavit, it is further contended that the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hands by suppressing the facts and disobeying the direction issued by the 2nd respondent, had raised illegal construction, and thus sought for dismissal of the Writ Petition.
23. I have taken note of respective contentions urged. 10
24. Though the 2nd respondent had filed counter-affidavit affirmed on oath on 01-02-2024, the said counter-affidavit filed is silent with regard to the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.4948 of 2023 whereby the intimation letter dated 30-01-2023 and Revised Fee Intimation letter dated 02-02-2023 were set aside and the matter was remitted back to the 2nd respondent for passing orders afresh in accordance with law.
25. Further, it is to be noted that the subject property in respect of which the authorities have issued intimation letter demanding payment of charges towards fee and charges for regularization of plot under LRS Scheme, the subject plot in respect of which building permission had been sought for by the petitioner and his two brothers on earlier occasion by making application on 05- 12-2022 do not form part of any unapproved layout in respect of which the 2nd respondent authority can demand payment of fee and charges for grant of building permission. Admittedly, the property bearing Door No.2-2-17 consisted of old Manglore tiled roof house with appurtenant land to an extent of 704 sq. yards belongs to petitioner's mother and on her demise, the said extent of land had been partitioned between the petitioner and his two 11 brothers, and thus, cannot be considered as plot in an approved layout for the authorities to demand the aforesaid payment.
26. Further, since this Court had considered a similar demand notices as issued in the case of petitioner's elder brother by passing its order dated 07-12-2023 in W.P. No.4948 of 2023, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is also entitled for grant of similar relief as granted to the petitioner in the above mentioned Writ Petition.
27. For the reasons alike as set out in the order dated 07-12- 2023 in W.P. No.4948 of 2023 and in terms thereof, the present Writ Petition is disposed of and the intimation letter dated 30-01- 2023 and Revised Fee Intimation letter dated 02-02-2023 are set aside.
28. It is made clear this Court has not expressed any opinion/view on the correctness or otherwise of the speaking order dated 17.01.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent and the petitioner is at liberty to workout remedies open to him in law, if he is aggrieved by the said order.
12
29. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
____________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date: 14.06.2024 Note :- Registry to append copy of the order dated 07-12-2023 in W.P.No.4948 of 2023 to this order.
B/o.
Vsv