Telangana High Court
Pappireddy Shilpa Reddy vs The State Of Telangana on 28 March, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.8101 of 2024
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the revocation letter, dt.18.03.2024, on the ground that the site under reference is falling in survey No.66/2 of Raidurg Nav Khalsa Village, Serilingampally Mandal under GHMC, Ranga Reddy District, and it is notified by revenue department under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908, and is covered by OS.No.92 of 2004, and moreover the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District addressed a letter dt.10.03.2022 not to issue permissions in survey No.66 of Raidurg Nav Khalsa Village, Serilingampally Mandal, without NOC from the competent authority, as being illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.2, Sri M.A.K.Mukheed, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondents No.3 to 5, and with the consent of the counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.
3. Petitioner contends that she is the absolute owner and possessor of plot No.111 admeasuring 210.5 sq. yards in survey 2 No.66/2 situated at Raidurg Nav Khalsa Village, Serilingampally Mandal under GHMC, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same under a registered Sale Deed bearing document No.1299/2023, dt.13.02.2024; and that she had approached the respondents- authorities and obtained building permission for construction of individual residential building consisting of Stilt for parking + 2 Upper floors in the said premises.
4. Petitioner further contends that the authorities claiming to have issued a show-cause notice, dt.07.03.2024, by uploading the same on TS-bPASS online portal, have issued the impugned proceeding revoking the building permission obtained by the petitioner on 24.02.2024.
5. Petitioner further contends that the show-cause notice stated to have been issued by the respondents-authorities calling for an explanation from the petitioner has not been served on the petitioner enabling her to submit explanation and thus the impugned revocation order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
6. Petitioner further contends that the respondents-authorities cannot insist for obtaining NOC from revenue authorities for grant of building permission and for the said reason also, the impugned order cannot be sustained.
3
7. In support of the aforesaid submission, petitioner has relied upon the order of this Court dt.09.01.2024 in W.P.No.533 of 2024.
8. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents fairly submits that this Court in W.P.No.29222 of 2023 and W.P.No.308 of 2024, had held that uploading of the show-cause notice on the TS-bPASS online portal cannot be considered as a valid mode of service in terms of Section 630 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), and as such the impugned order revoking the building permission granted in favour of the petitioner may be set aside and liberty may be granted to the respondents-authorities to cause fresh notice on the petitioner by serving the same in the manner prescribed under Section 630 of the Act and take further action in the matter.
9. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.
10. Without delving into the other contentions raised by the petitioner, since the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, as the show-cause notice, dt.07.03.2024, was not served on the petitioner in the manner prescribed under Section 630 of the Act, this Court is of the view that the impugned order cannot be sustained.
4
11. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. However, liberty is granted to the respondents-authorities to issue a fresh show-cause notice to the petitioner; take steps to serve the same on the petitioner in the manner prescribed under Section 630 of the Act; afford sufficient time to the petitioner to submit her explanation thereto; grant an opportunity of personal hearing, and thereafter pass a reasoned order in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner.
12. Subject to the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
13. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_____________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J 28th March, 2024.
gra