Gurram Janardhan Reddy v. The Ibrahimpatnam Municipality

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

Judgment date: 2026-04-24

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-24. Gurram Janardhan Reddy v. The Ibrahimpatnam Municipality. Read the judgment and case details on...

Judgment text

[ 325s ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE N. V. SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITIO N NO: 13345 OF 2026 Between: Gunam Janardhan Reddy, S/o. Papi Reddy, Occupation Business, aged about 6O years, Fi/o. lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The lbrahimpatnam Municipality, rep. by its Commissioner, lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District. 2. The State of Telangana, rep. by Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....

RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ and direct the Pt respondent not to interfere in any manner with the fencing of the petitioner covering the land in Sy. Nos. 209, 210, 211, 212, 213,214, 225, 226, 227 and 228 ot lbrahimpatnam, near N. R. Function Hall or the activity of the petitioner in leveling and cleaning the land since the petitioner is not undertaking any layout activity on the land. I. A. NO:1 OF 2026 Petition Under section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 1st respondent not to interfere in any manner with the fencing of the petitioner covering the land in Sy. Nos. 209, 21O. 211, 212. 213, 214,225' 226,227 and 228 ol l ,ry . '/ lbrahimpatnam, near N.

R Function Hall or the activity of the petitioner in levelling and cleaning the land since the petitioner is not undertaking . any layout activity on the land, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VEDULA VENKATA RAMANA, SENIOR COUNSEL REPRESENTING SRI CH. LAKSHMAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 : SRI S. RAVINDlER REDDY, SC FOR IBRAHIMPATNAM MUNICIPALITY Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 : G. P FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT The Court made the following ORDER IN THE HIGH COUR'I IJOII'IFIE S'TA]'E OF TELANGANA AT HYDEIIAI}AI) THE HONOURABLE SRI N. V. SHI{AVAN KUMAR JUSTICE WRIT PETITION No. l3345 of 2026 DA'IE OIr OIIDEI(: 24. 04. 2026 Betwecn: Gurram Rctldv S7o I)api f(11r1. 1t' Janardharr ... Petitioner AND The lbral-rirnpatnarn Munici pral i tr, rcpresenk:cl by its Commissioner, Ibrahinriratnanr, Ilanga Rctlt1r, [)istrict and Arrother. . .. Respondents ORDEI{: Heard Sri v'cdui.

r \, cnkata Ramana, learned Senior Counsel reprcscnting Sri Ch. [-akshm. lrl Kunrar, lczrrnccl courrscl for the pctitioncr ancl Sri S-Ravinder lleticlr', learnctl Stancling Counsel for Ibrahimpatnam Municipality appear ing li)r' responrlcrlt No. l. With thc conse'nt of both the partics, the writ pctittor) is Lxrinll takcn u1; for disposal 't'his 2. writ potition h. rs [rt:t'rr l. ilcel s,. ,cking the following prayer:- "lo rcsu( n l,\,ril t. ,l-! \htkitutlus L,r nt1/ ollur rrpproprirttc u'ril nn direct tlx 1't rcsytondcri tttr[ ltt tntcr. lt'rL' in nrLil nttttner u,iLlt the oi tlu fencing petitioner (o? crint (r/ Ilu' Larul il Nos. l09. 2'10. 211, 212, 213, 214, 225, 2? 6,227 trul )28 o[ lbnrltittrpttttint , tvnr N. ll. l-unttion llnll or tlp octit'ittl Ltl llrc ptlttrtttitr tt l(rcllnig nltl . Lein-i g ilp Ltlnd stnce tlu r t;ol ttttrfurltttrnt:utt l,tlot! l &tit'tlV i)11 tlrc ! nnd nntl llctitiotu'r granl strClr Otlrcr rL'1rc. |'n:; il riL't'ttrs lil : llu.

, it r It)tsttr Ctli ()[ llt afisc... " i I . i ,: 3. hc casc ()t th(, p.. trtl(Jn(,r is lhat ho is thc aLrscrlutt, ()! \. ncr and possessor of thc land adnrc. rsuring rn S\. Nos. 209, 210,21"1, 212,211,214,225, 226,227 ancl 228 siluatctl ar lbrahinrp. rtnaur, llanga lleddv District, . rnel th,-, samc is his arrccstral prop('! t\ It is sLrtrurrttcd that, in ordcr to subject lrlotect thc land lrom t^cr. achmouis, tlte pctrti. ncr lras put up f(:ncirlg altd is carrying out Icvelling and clcaning acti\ itics within the sai. 1 lan. 1. It is further subn-ritted tlrat tlrc lst rosPonclcnt issucrl a noticc bt:ar. rng No. Cl/ flsrllBp/08/2026, dated 17. 04. 2026 allclJi. ii th. rt thc petitr. rlor is Lr. c{t,rt. rking unauthorizcd Iavout devcloprrcnt n,ithout. biai. ing pr. i. r appro'al from the compe[ent authorilr,, in r. ,iol. rtion oi tlrt, pru^. isiorrs of thc l clangana Municipalities Act, 2()19 and the iJMl)A Act, 1008, ancl clircctt,cl stofrpagc of tl-re said activity.

It is submitted that thc petitiorrcr had subrnrttctl a lcph to the said notrcc clarifying th;rt ni, Iavorrt ar tivitv is bcirr:1 undertakcn and tltat he would ttbtain ncccssar] if |r. r'missions, rcrluirccl, L. retorc unclcrt.. rking such activity, and that the prcscnt activit\ rs confiuecl onlr,' to Ievelling and cleaning of thc land. It is furthcr sLtbrnittcrl th. rt, clcspitc tho said explanation, thc petitioner apprehends intc'rtt'rr:ncc bv the rcs;rontlcnt autltorities with the fencing and interfering in his pcaccf ul p()ssession over the su bject land without following due proccss. of larr Questionlng the s. rrtre, the lrresent rrrit petition is filed. 4. Lcarned Sctrror Counsel appcar ing ftrr tl. rc petitioner submits that the notice w,as issuecl stating th. rt tl. rc' pctitioncr hatl undertaken unauthorized lavout devcloprncnl n,ithout oLrtaining anv prr:rr. nissiorr lrom thc competent . ruthoritl , u,,hich is iir r. iolatiorr of Scctiorr 17.

1 ot thc lelangana Nfunicipalities Act, 20lg ancl the prrot'tsit. rtts ot the l lN'II)A t' 200U Learncd Senior Counsel 'At not intcnd to divide the said lands further submits that the pctitiorlcr ''locs in future' if such lands are into plots ancl wtluld take appropriate pt-'rrnissiou to be converted into Plots. submits for [brahimpatnam Municipality 5. I-earned Standing Counsel antl that the petitioner the notice was tlnly issuutl scekinli t'r;rtanition that 'rn hasalsosubnrittcr. ilrisexpl. tn. ltiorloll2],()+'2026tcltheCommissioner, be considered Ibrahimpatnam Municipalitv anr'l the same rr'oulcl tll'ldc bv tlle lcarned counsel on 6. Having regard to rhc sutrnlissiotts notice is only a show either sidc ancl itr Vieu' ol th(' tnct th. it tht'imPugnctl cause notice, for u'hich the lrad allcacly rcplied on 22 04'2026' this Pctitioncr ()l thc writ directing Court deems it appropri. rte tti ciisl-rosc Petition' roPl\"/t'\Pl'rnatiotr lo the notice clated respondcnt No.

l to cottsi''lt'r tll(' 17. 04. 2026arrcittllltlrvt{uuplrtlccsst)lla\\,t]l'l()1. (. takirlgal-ry[urtheracticltlin respect of the subject Profrcrt\'. T. Accordinglr',withtlreabtlr. t:tlirt'. ctttltrs,thisWritPetitionisdisposed order it aur pentlin5l' shall stand closed No o[. Miscellaneous applicatiorrs, as to costs SD/- A. SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// 6 SECTION OFFICER To Ranga 1. The commissioner, lbrahimpatnam Municipality, lbrahimpatnam, Reddy District. State of Telangana' rep by Principal-Secretary' 2. The Principal Secretary, -MunicipalAdrini. trrtio'nandUrbanDevelopmentDepartment'Secretariat' Hyderabad. ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN 3. Two CC's to G. P FOR MUNICIPAL (ouT) atHyderabad court for the State of Telangana DEVELOPMENT, High [OPUC] +. One CC to M/s BHARADWAJ ASSOCIATES, Advocate v 5. One CC to SRI S. RAVINDIER REDDY, SC FOR |BRAH|MPATNAM MUNICIPALITY, Advocate (OPUC) 6. Two CD Copies SA GJP M), C. C.

TODAY HIGH COURT DATED: 2410412026 \ 1t t4:ti ^ ) s * ORDER n a\ ,i \- WP. No. 13345 of 2026 ,LL o c\ ( Llz , ,'-) r! , ' '. ,1 ''i-. 12 Hs,,q \. ';'t"" s::-J:: DISPOSING OF THE W. P WITHOUT COSTS. ? , . LL r^ "), 7

Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.