Chettaboyina Ashok v. The State Of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: E.V. VENUGOPAL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2025-11-21. Chettaboyina Ashok v. The State Of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
32ee [ l HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO: 35463 OF 2025 Between: 1. Chettaboyina Ashok, s/o Ch. Jangaiah, Aged 48 yrs, Occ. Business, Fl/o. H. No. 3-3-5/15/8, Bharat Nagar, Ramanthapur, Uppal, Hyderabad, Telangana. 2. Chettaboyina Mahesh, s/o Ch. Jangaiah, Aged 37 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o Srinagar Colony, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad. 3. Chettaboyina Mallesh, s/o Ch. Jangaiah, Aged 35 yrs, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H. No. 3-3-5/15/8, Bharath Nagar, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad ... PETITIONERS AND 1. The State Of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Govt. , Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, T. S. 2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Collectorate, Kongarakalan, Ranga Reddy District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. 4.
The Tahasildar cum Deputy Collector, Serilingampally mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 5. The Mandal Revenue lnspector, Serilingampally mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 6. The Special Officer cum Deputy Collectoi, Office of Urban Landing Ceiling, Collectorate, Kongarakalan, Ranga Reddy District. ... 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, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to demolish the under construction residential building situated in the Northern part of Plot No. 252, admeasuring 150 sq. yards forming part of Sy. No.
104/1 (part), situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, GHMC Serilingampally Circle, Ranga Reddy District, without any authority and without issuing any notice or opportunity and without following due procedure, as being illegal, arbitrary' unconstitutional, in violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 3004 of constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondents not to demolish the structures in the above said residential plot and also direct the respondents not to interfere with the rights of the petitioner in respect of the said plot. ti t lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed inr support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respcndents - -not to demolish, interfere or obstruct the ongoing constructions made by petitioner in the Northern part of Plot No. 252, admeasuring 150 sq. yards forming part of Sy. No.
104/1 (part), situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, GHMC Serilingampally Circle, Ranga Reddy District pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P. LAKSHMA REODY Counsel for the Respondents No. 1to6: SRI L. RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER ,. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL WRIT ON No. of 20,25, ORDER: The present writ petition is liled by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief : "... to i-ssue a writ, order or direction, more particttlarlg one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declarinq the action of the respondents in seektnq to demolish the under construction residentiat buitdinq situated in the Northem part of Plot No. 252, admeasurinq 150 sq. uards forminq part qf S!. 1. No.
lO4/ 1 (part), situated at Kondapur Villaqe, SerilinqampallU Mandal, GHMC Seilinqampatlu Circle, Ranga Reddu District, without anu authoritu and without issuinq any notice or opportunitu and without followino due procedure, as beinq tlleqal, arbitrary, unconstttutional, in uiolation of principles of natural . iustice and in uiolation of Articles 14, 21 and 3OOA of constitution of India and consequentlu direct the respondents not to demolish the structures in the aboue said residential ptot and also direct the 'respondents not to interfere with the riqhts of the petitioners in respect of the said plot and be pleased to pass... " , 2. Heard Sri P. Lakshma Reddy, lear:ned counsel for the petitioners and Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos. 1 to 6 and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are developers undertaking construction of a residential complex on Plot No.
252, in survey No. lo4/r(part), admeasuring 1s0 sq. yards, situated at Kondapur village, serilingampally Mandal, under -l Page2 of 6 GHMC Serilingampally Circle, Ranga Reddy District' Originally Smt' possessor of land in was the absolute owner and Abbineni Anasuya Ranga Reddy I Sy. No. lo4ll of Kondpaur Village, Serlingampally Mandal, the lands in with three others have divided District. She along 1. total Lo2, 1o3, |o4 l, llo 1 1 admeasuring Sy. Nos. 101, l 12 and Acs. 57. 2oguntasintohousesiteplotsbydrawingalayoutaSperthe dated layout of the then HUDA uid"e |etter No. 291/MPU/HUDA/s2, sold plot The said smt. Abbineni Anasuya ad three others 04. O2. 1g82. layclut, forming part o[ 300 sq. yards in the said No. 252 admeasuring K. Rao through registered in favour of one Smt. Bharathi Sy. No. |o4l l, 3l who in documen t o.
16671 of 2003, dated '12'2003' sale deed bearing same turn sold tlre to the vendors of the petitioners Sri Gandla Ganga Reddy and Sri Kunta Ramulu, under a registered sale deed bearing The vendors of the No. 11836 0f 2012, dated Lg. to. 20|2- Document I of Sale-cum-GPA in a registered Agreement petitioners executed of plot No. 252 zrdmeasuring 150 sq' respecr of the northern portion yardsoutof3oosq. yardsinfavourofoneGopireddyVenkata Reddy uid"e Document No. 2866/ 2025, dated o3'o2'2o25' Indranivas said portion of the petitioners purchased the northern subsequently, sq'yards through a 150 sq. yards out of 300 plot No. 252 admeasuring No' 12333 of 2025' dated bearing document registered sale deed GPA holder and has been in peaceful 25. 08. 2025 from the said then' Pursuant to -the said possession ernd enjoyment thereof since Page 3 of6 development agreement, the petitioners obtained valid building permission to construct stilt + 2 upper floors from the GHMC uide Permit No.
38O2IGHMC/IA lC2O /2025 in File No. O t824s / GHMC / O4s 9 I / IBAP / C2O / 2025, dated 23. LO . 2025. (a) While construction was proceeding strictly in accordance with the sanctioned plan, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 allegedly interfered with the construction activity and threatened demolition without issuing any notice or having any lawful justification, thereby prompting the present writ petition. (b) The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the subject matter of the present writ petition is identical to that in w. P. No. 18499 of 2022, wherein this court, by order dated os. o7. 2022, disposed of the said writ petition directing the official respondents not to interfere with the possession, enjoyment and cDnstruction being carried on by the petitioners therein. He therefore seeks similar relief in the present case.
(c) It is also submitted that though the subject land, along with adjacent survey numbers, was once the subject matter of proceedings under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, those proceedings were set aside by this court vide orders in w. p. Nos. 10gl3 and 1g342 of 2008 dated o2. o3. 2o09, which were subsequently confirmed by the Page 4 of6 Honble Supreme Court in S. L. P. Nos. 10424-10427 of 2074, dated 03. o2. 20t4 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, representing the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, contends that the petitioners claim of lawful possession and development rights is disputed a. nd subject to verification. The Development Agreement and Power of Attorney relied upon by the petitioners do not exempt the petitioners flrom compliance with statutory regulations under the GHMC Act, building bye-laws or other applicable larvs. It is submitted that any action by respondent Nos.
4 and 5 was purely administrative in nature, intended to ensure compliance with statutory provisions and does not amount to arbitrary interference. The writ petition, it is urged, is premature and misconceived. 5. This Court has considered the rival sub-i"$o. r" and perused the material placed on record, including the orclers passed in W. P. No. 18499 of 2022. ln that case, based on the written instructions dated 18. 04. 2022 issued by the District Collector and the letter addressed to the Commissioner and Inspector General, Stamps and Registration Department, Telangana, Hyderabad, in C. C. No. H2l30l82, dated O1. 10. 2019, ttris Court held that the Government had no claim over the lands situated in Sy. No. 103 and other survey numbers of Kondapur Village*and directed deletion of those lands from the list of proh^ibited t Page 5 of6 properties notified under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908.
Consequently, this Court directed the oflicial respondents therein not to interfere with the possession, enjoyment and construction being carried on by the petitioners pursuant to the permissions granted to them. (a) As seen from the record, the land covered by the present writ petition forms part of the very same transaction under sale deed Document No. 12333 of 2025, dated 25. 08. 2025 and the subject matter \ is identical to that in w. P. No. L8499 of 2022. once the lands in Sy. No. 103 of Kondapur Village were directed to be released from the prohibited list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the same reasoning equally applies to the subject land in Sy. No. lO4l1(part). (b) Accordingly and following the reasons and observations made in W. P. No.
l8499 of 2022, this writ petition is disposed of directing the oflicial respondents not to interfere u,itkr the petitioners possession, enjoyment and construction activities being carried on pursuant to the building permission granted vide Permit No. 38O2/GHMC/IA /C2O/2O25 in File No. Ol8245lGHMC/O4891IIBAP lC2O 12025, dated 23. 10. 2025, over land admeasuring 150 sq. yards, in Plot No. 252, Survey No. 1O4/ l(part), situated at Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, GHMC Serilingampally Circle, Ranga Reddy District, in any manner. Page 6 of6 6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Needless to mention this order will not preclude the official respondent to follow clue process of law as established by law in case if the petitioners are found in illegal possession of the property and if the situation so warrant. There shall be no order as to costs. All miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-K. BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT tL. , .
: ,/]TRUE COPY// OFFICER fn d. . To, 1 The Principal Secretary to Govt. , Revenue Department, Secretariat, Telangana State, Hyderabad, T. S. 2. The District Collector, Ran$ Reddy District, Collectorate, Kongarakalan, Ranga Reddy District. ',, 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. 4. The Tahasildar cum Deputy Collector, Serilingampally mandal, Ranga Reddy District. il i 5. The Mandal Revenue lnsf,eEtor, Serilingampally mandal, Ranga Reddy District. i;. i,r I: , 6. The Special Officer cum Dfi. rty Collector, Office of Urtan Landing Ceiling, Collectorate, Kongarakalan, Ranga Reddy District. 7. One CC to SRI P. LAKSHMA RED. DY, Advocate. IOPUC] ,:i 8. Two CCs to GP FOR RE\E^NUE, High Court for the State of Telangana r tourl ,. t 9. Two CD Copies. BSK 6 PMK HIGH COURT DATED i2111112025 :l I vl 'tFl AQ ') '"J Z', ! ,Iilll zffi ORDER * of 2025 WP. No. 35463 \ .. : 0 PETITION D ISPOSING OF THE WRIT WITHOUT COSTS I
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.