ORDER:
Heard learned Amicus curiae appearing for the petitioner; and Ms. Yenuka Nishitha, learned counsel representing Mr. Midde Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4.
2. The writ petition is filed for the following relief:
"…..to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not taking any action against the illegal constructions made by the respondent Nos.5 to 8 in the premises bearing Municipal Nos.5-4-683, 5-4-685 and 5-4-686 situated at Kattalmandi, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad-500 001, as illegal, void, violative of principles of natural justice, violative of
1
Articles 300-A of the Constitution of India, and also contrary to the provisions of the G.H.M.C. Act & Building Permission Rules, and consequently to direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to remove the illegal constructions made by the respondent Nos.5 to 8 in the premises bearing Municipal Nos. 5-4-683, 5-4-685 and 5-4-686 situated at Kattalmandi, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad-500 001; and pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
3. Learned Amicus curiae appearing for the petitioners would contend that, despite submitting a specific representation dated 27.04.2017, the respondent-Corporation had not initiated any action. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file the present writ petition.
4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC reiterating the contentions raised in the counter-affidavit would contend that, after filing of the writ petition, as the unofficial respondents further proceeded with the unauthorized construction of the 4th and 5thfloors, in deviation of the sanctioned plan, the respondent-Corporation issued a notice dated 24.06.2017 under Section 452(2) of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, ("GHMC Act") 1955, followed by a final notice dated
2
14.07.2017 under Section 636 of the GHMC Act. It is further submitted that the respondent-Corporation would take further recourse of demolition of unauthorized construction by addressing a letter to the police official seeking police protection.
5. It is further contended that the respondents-Corporation has also filed caveats before the City Civil Court to ensure that the unofficial respondents do not obtain any ex-parte injunction orders against the proposed action of the respondent- Corporation.
6. In view of the fact that the respondents-Corporation has already initiated action pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 27.04.2017 by issuing notices under Sections 452(2) and 636 under the provisions of the GHMC Act, 1955, respondent No.4 is directed to deal with the matter in pursuance of the notice issued under Section 636 of the GHMC Act, 1955, strictly in accordance with law.
7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
8. The assistance rendered by the learned Amicus Curiae is appreciated.
3
Miscellaneous petitions, if any are pending, shall stand closed.
_________________________________
SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, J
Date: 23.07.2026 bj
4