Telangana High Court
Smt. R. Laxmi vs Boduppal Municipal Corporation And 3 ... on 14 July, 2022
Author: Lalitha Kanneganti
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
W.P.No.28213 of 2022
ORDER
This writ petition is filed questioning the impugned proceedings dated 25-06-2022 vide Order No.155/UC/BMC/2022 issued by respondent No.1 directing removal of the unauthorised construction in the land of petitioner in Plot No.4 in Sy.No.5, admeasuring 200 sq. yards situated at Miyapur Village, Sapthagiri Hills, Boduppal Gram Panchayat, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, on the specious ground that the land is surplus land, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.S. Hariharan submits that the petitioner was granted instant approval vide permit order dated 21-07-2021 and that as per TS-bPASS Act, within 21 days, if the respondent Corporation has failed to grant permission for commencement of the construction, it is a deemed approval and the petitioner can go ahead with the construction. He submits that the petitioner has laid the slab and the respondent-Corporation has issued the proceedings dated 25-06-2022 to remove that unauthorised constructions. He submits that the respondent Corporation has issued a notice to the petitioner on 28-04-2022 and the petitioner has submitted a reply on 30-04-2022. He submits that in the impugned proceedings, it is stated that as already the building permission granted in favour of petitioner was revoked stating that the petitioner has made 2 LK, J W.P.No.28213 of 2022 construction of ground +1 floor unauthorizedly without obtaining any permission from the competent authority, the same shall be removed within 24 hours. Learned counsel submits that the respondents cannot revoke the permission without issuing any notice to the petitioner. He has also relied upon the order dated 13.12.2021 in Writ Petition No.20398 of 2021 and batch, wherein this Court considered the issue at length and at paras 12 and 13 directed as under:
"12. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that in order to justify the action taken by the respondent authorities in revoking the building permission of the petitioners, they ought to have acted fairly and in strict adherence to the principles of natural justice. However, since the learned Special Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the impugned revocation letters passed against the petitioners stand withdrawn to the extent of revocation of permission to construct buildings, the said submission is placed on record. The impugned revocation letters passed by the respondent authorities against the petitioners stand withdrawn to the extent of revocation of permission to construct buildings, in terms of submissions made by the learned Special Government Pleader. The petitioners are directed to submit their explanations to the objections pointed out in the impugned revocation letters to the respondent authorities within a period of two weeks from today. On such submission of explanations by the petitioners, the respondent authorities are entitled to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with the provisions of TS-bPASS Act and the Rules made thereunder, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of such explanations. In case, if no orders are passed by the respondent authorities within the time indicated above, there shall be deemed approval of the applications of the petitioners filed for construction of buildings. It is made clear that until passing of orders by the respondent authorities within the time prescribed on the explanations submitted by the petitioners, the petitioners shall not proceed with any type of constructions in their respective subject lands.
3 LK, J W.P.No.28213 of 2022
13. As regards the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No. 32665 of 2021 that the revocation order was passed without recording any objections, the respondent authorities are directed to bring the objections to the notice of the petitioner therein within a period of one week from today; and on receipt of such objections, the petitioner shall submit his explanation to the said objections within two weeks thereafter; and on submission of such explanation by the petitioner, the respondent authorities are entitled to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the provisions of TS-bPASS Act and the Rules made thereunder within one week from the date of receipt of such explanation. In case, if no orders are passed by the respondent authorities within the time indicated above, there shall be deemed approval of the application of the petitioner filed for construction of building. It is made clear that until passing of orders by the respondent authorities within the time prescribed on the explanations submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner shall not proceed with any type of constructions in his subject land."
3. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Corporation Mr. N. Praveen Kumar also does not dispute the fact that no notice was given to the petitioner before passing the revocation order. He submits that within 21 days, under TS-bPASS Act, if the respondent- Corporation did not grant any permission for commencement of the construction, it amounts to deemed approval.
4. In view of the above and in the light of the orders of this Court in Writ Petition No.20398 of 2021 and batch, dated 13.12.2021, the revocation of order is bad and as such, the revocation order dated 19-08-2021 is set aside and the respondents shall issue an appropriate notice to the petitioner on the revocation order and then, they shall proceed in accordance with law.
4 LK, J W.P.No.28213 of 2022
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the proceedings dated 25-06-2022 as well as the revocation order dated 19-08-2021. No order as to costs.
6. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
____________________________ SMT LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 14th July, 2022.
sj