AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Veera Babu Gandu, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. M. Sahas Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3; Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned standing counsel for Municipalities, appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings, appearing for respondent No.6 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondent No.8.
Grievance of the petitioners is that respondent Nos.4 to 8 are trying to demolish the properties of the petitioners without following due process of law and without paying any compensation.
Learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 submitted that show-cause notices dated 29.05.2026 under Sections 174(4) and 178(2) of the Telangana Municipalities Act 2019 (Act 2019) were issued to petitioners directing them to submit explanation as to why the unauthorized construction made them on the subject property should not be removed, altered or pulled down under Section 178(2) of the Act 2019. It is stated that prior to notice dated 29.05.2026, notices dated 01.04.2026 and 03.04.2026 were issued to the petitioners under Section 254 of the Act 2019 directing the petitioners to submit documents. As the petitioners did not respond to the said notice and did not submit any documents consequently show-cause notices dated 29.05.2026 were issued to the petitioners, which are impugned in this writ petition and so far no orders have been passed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that building permissions were issued to the family members/vendors in respect of the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 5 and 6. Initially, when notices dated 01.04.2026 and 03.04.2026 were received by the petitioners, as all the required documents were not readily available, they failed to submit the same. Petitioners have annexed copies of all building permissions issued in their favour to this writ petition and the same will be submitted to respondent No.4.
Learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 submitted that petitioner Nos.5, 8 and 9 do not have any building permission.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner No.5 is granted building permission vide No.57 GP/67 dated 14.06.1968. So far as, petitioner Nos.8 and 9 are concerned, there is no allegation that they have constructed building without any sanctioned plan. Petitioners are ready to submit additional documents and they may be permitted to file additional documents in support of their claim that there is no encroachment as alleged by respondent authorities.
In the light of above submissions, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioners to submit explanation and all documents, if any, not filed so far to respondent No.4 within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, respondent No.4 shall cause enquiry pursuant to the show-cause notices dated 29.05.2026 and pass orders in accordance with law, by affording opportunity of hearing to petitioners and all other concerned/interested persons, within a period of four (4) weeks thereof. Until such exercise is completed, status quo, obtaining as on today, shall be maintained in respect of the subject property. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed.