H.R. Ravindra Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 15 May, 2026

    0
    18
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Telangana High Court

    H.R. Ravindra Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 15 May, 2026

              IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                              AT HYDERABAD
    
                      HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
    
                           WRIT PETITION No.16725 of 2026
                                     DATED: 15.05.2026
    
    Between:
    H.R. Ravindra Kumar
    
                                                                                 ...Petitioner
    
                                               AND
    
    The State of Telangana,
    Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
    Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department,
    Government of Telangana,
    State Secretariat, Hyderabad and (03) others.
    
                                                                            ...Respondents
    
                                            ORDER
    

    This writ petition is filed for the following relief:

    “to issue any order direction or Writ more particularly in
    the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the
    respondent No.3 in issuing Intimation Notice
    No.594/11/UC/TPS/C-35/GHMC/2026, dated 13.05.2026
    asking the petitioner to vacate his premises No.6//594/11
    situated at Gandhi Thatha Nagar, Khairatabad, Hyderabad
    for sealing of the premises under Section 461-A of GHMC Act,
    2026 without giving any reasonable opportunity of hearing to
    the petitioner as highly illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional
    being violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution
    of India and prayed to stay all further proceedings in
    pursuance of the Intimation Notice No.594/11/UCTPS/C-
    35/GHMC/2026, dated 13.05.2026 issued by respondent
    No.3 for the alleged sealing of the House property bearing
    Municipal No.6-3-594/11, Gandhi Thatha Nagar,
    Khairatabad, Hyderabad…”

    2. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government

    SPONSORED

    Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development
    2

    Department appearing for respondent No.1 and learned Standing

    Counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent No.2.

    3. With the consent of both the parties, the matter is taken up for

    disposal at the stage of admission.

    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.3

    issued Intimation Notice No.595/10/UC/TPS/GHMC/2025

    dated 21.01.2026, directing the petitioner to vacate and hand over the

    premises within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice for the

    purpose of sealing the premises under Section 461-A of the GHMC Act,

    1955. It is further submitted that respondent No.3 thereafter issued

    Notice No.595/10/UC/TPS/C17/2026 dated 28.02.2026, calling upon

    the petitioner to appear before him on 07.03.2026 at 10:30 A.M,

    however, no hearing took place on the said date and the matter was

    subsequently adjourned to 28.03.2026. It is further submitted that,

    even on 28.03.2026, no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the

    petitioners and, without conducting any hearing, respondent No.3 issued

    the impugned Intimation Notice No.594/11/UC/TPS/C35/GHMC/2026

    dated 13.05.2026, directing the petitioners to vacate the premises within

    a short period of three days for sealing of the premises. Thus, the

    principal grievance of the petitioners is that respondent No.3 issued the

    impugned intimation notice without affording any opportunity of hearing,

    thereby acting in violation of the principles of natural justice and

    fairness.

    3

    5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submits

    that there are deviations in the construction made by the petitioner and

    further submits that the said construction was not completed within the

    stipulated period prescribed under the sanctioned plan/permission. It is

    therefore contended that respondent No.3 has initiated action strictly in

    accordance with the provisions of the GHMC Act, 1955.

    6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the

    material on record, this Court is of the opinion that impugned Intimation

    dated 13.05.2026 is in violation of the principles of natural justice and is

    not sustainable in law, and is liable to be set aside. In view of the same,

    the Impugned Intimation vide Notice

    No.594/11/UC/TPS/C35/GHMC/2026 dated 13.05.2026 is set aside.

    Respondent No. 3 is directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner and

    thereafter afford him a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing as

    well as an opportunity to produce all relevant documents, before

    proceeding to take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law.

    7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

    Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition,

    shall stand closed.

    _____________________________
    JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
    Date: 15.05.2026
    Bw



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here