HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER WRIT PETITION Nos.1 1437 0F 2009 & 23664 0F 2010 WP No.11437 of 2009: Between: 1 T.R.Rajender Kumar, S/o.Late T.P.Ratnaiah R/o 3-10-4, Trimulgherry' Secunderabad. 2, Smt.Ratna, W/o.Sri ChaitanYa 3. KumSwaPna, D/o.T.R.Venkatesh 4. Kum Rachana, D/o.T.R.Venkatesh IAN AND The Cantonment Board' S P Road' ^C-ourt Compound" Secunderabad' ;;;,;;;i;i ;t ii' o'i"t Executive officer' ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the-Col:litu]lo'n of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in 'irt" 'itii'"li tited 'tne'rewitr' the High court may be oleased to issue a wrrt'll ih;;;i"; 9f wtll 'ot trrtanoamus or any'other 'a ffi p ri a te w ri t o r -'' i l',Jjt " l" :i;: ",,", "'-*Sll:'alg ": :II!:t? il,:l 53 iiJc"uainss--^ dt ''^iite of tne Respondent nuiJ'i ut irr"sal' arbitrary'and EIwii6olzoze on the file of th-e,xe:.::I;;";;;no"nt to iorthwith consider u n co nstitutional and to consequently direct th-e.,re! ularise the constructlons by iil | ", " ",' " I - o n "' -.:,tT l:""d iJ Jji l[J!i= l",:,i ]iiX.:; ; I .;l .', tSS I m :; collectinq compoun0rns r::r;;J;;;; in A.s. No.s Judge, CitY Civil Court' I costs. (Petitioners No.2 to 4 are R/o.H No 160, Sarojinidevi Road' Secunderabad) ..,PETITIONERS O:1 oF2022 the circumstances stated Court may be Pleaseo to he resPondent hereln' as *rii,il,tt{[fr[]{tlk3",r,:"!fl $i.,it'i* ioditronat mate(\a\ QaQe\s WP NO:23664 OF 2010 Betwee n: 1 T.R. Rajender Kumar, S/o. Late T.P. Ratnaiah R/o. 3-10-4, Trimulgherry, Secunderabad Smt. Ratna, W/o. Sri Chaitanya R/o. H.No. 160 Sarojini Devi Road, Secunderabad Kum Swapna, D/o. T.R. Venkatesh R/o. H.No. 160 Sarojini Devi Road, Secunderabad Kum Rachana, D/o. T.R. Venkatesh R/o. H.No Secunderabad ..,PETITIONERS 2 3 4 160 Sarojini Devi Road, AND The Cantonment Board. S p Road, Court Compound, Secunderabad Rep by its Chief Executive Officer 2 Health Superintendent, Cantonment Board, Secunderabad ...RESPONDENTS WPMP. NO: 30283 0F 2010 Petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit rir"o ir..,er"*itn *re riibrr'bJrri iuv uu pleased to issue a Writ of ^ltanoamus or ,1y 9in", ,ppropriate Writ or Writs, Order or Direction, declarino the proceedings ot zi A zOro"in Lr. No. H./UGD/2.12 on the file of the 2nd Reso6ndent herein, ;; lilG; ,;diirary, without jurisdicarion and viotative of principles of naturat ;r.ti..; n*.iJ tJ.[. petition under section 151 cpc praying that. in-the circumstances stated in the affidavit fited in support or tne peiitioi]ini'ij[r-, 9g!.,1lrv be pleaseJ srant sray or a, fu(her Drocee1"g: oj ,s.B ,;ib.i; ir rvo..nvUCo t2012 on the fite of the 2nd Respondent herein, pending Oirpo."f .of il/ p No. of 2010 counser for the petitioners (in both wps): sRr K.RAGHUVEER REDDy counser for the Respondent (in both wps); sRl K.R.KorEswERA RAo SC for Cantonment The Court made the foltowing: THE HON'BLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER WRIT PETITION Nos.11437 of 2009 & 23664 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: Since the issue involved and the parties to both these writ petitions are one and the same, both these writ petitions are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order' 2. In W.P.No.11437 of 2009, the petitioners are challenging the proceedings of the respondent/Cantonment Board, Secunderabad' vide Lr.No.scB/EB/OP/Sv.No'27 lllAoc Gate/1160/2029' dated 23.05.2009, whereby the request of petitioner No'1 for regularization of unauthorized constructions was rejected' I 3. In W.P.No'23 664 of 2010' the petitioners are challenging the proceedings of the respondent No'1/Cantonment Board' Secunderabad, vide Lr'No'HsiUGDl2072' dated 23'08'2010' whereby, the permission for laying underground drains for disposal of effruents from the septic tank etc., from the premises of the petitioners in Sy'No 7111' AOC Gate' Secunerabad' was cancelled' 4. Heard both sides' Perused the record' I During the course of submissions' the learned counsel for in both these writ petitions brought to the notice of this nptitioners 1 Court that recently, the Respondent Board had passed a resolution on 17.t2.2021, vide "Exclusion of certain areas of a building from calculation of FSI - Ref: CBR No.16, daled t7.12.2021" wherein, certain guidelines were approved with regard to exclusion of areas from the purview of FSI, keeping in view the necessity and utility to the main building. In view oF the same, the petitioners in both these writ petitions intend to withdraw both these writ petitions with a liberty to make a fresh representation to the respondent Board in terms of the aforesaid resolution, dated 17. 12.zOZt. 6. Sri K.R.Koteshwara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Cantonment Board, Secunderabad, appearing for the respondents in both these writ petitions would submit that the property covered by these writ petitions consists of different blocks and hence, the petitioners are not entired to make constructions over the said property, in view of the aforesaid resolution, dated 17.12.202I also. 7. Refuting the said submission, the learned petitioners in both thr latest resorution, oateo writ petitions wourd co of rhe cases on hand unl"," "''021' sQuarely app11 d the petitioners are entifled counsel for the ntend that the es to the facts for the benefit -) of said resotution and sought permission of this Court to withdraw both these writ petitions with a liberty as indicated above. B. In view of these circumstances, both these writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn, granting liberty to the petitioners to make a Fresh representation to the respondent/Cantonment Board, Secunderabad, in terms of the Resolution, dated 77'L2'2021' in accordance with the procedure established under law' It is needless to state that in the event of the petitioners making such an application, the respondent Board shall examine and dispose of the same, in accordance with law' Miscellaneous petitions' if any' pen petitions, shall stand closed' There shall b //TRUE COPY// ding in both these writ e no order as to costs' ASSIST SD/-L.S IVA PA T REG RVATHI ISTRAR SECTION OFFICE R nd, To, fi,"!,qi.:;$"l*t"ffi :::::"'tfrdr'"'::::'"' ,1 2. 3. 4 5 fvlRC SB \ HIGH COURT DATED:21 10212022 COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.1 1431 of2009 & 23664 of 2010 il#ff H.ii,?I#,If,:yiiH?3r,oNs n lHE s14 k 3 o() 1 \ti:. Mll,l 1 -5r$ j ^L), i,