Telangana High Court Perkari Jayasree vs The State Of Telangana on 7 June, 2024 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No. 6651 of 2023 O R D E R: Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department appearing for respondent No.1, Sri S. Surender Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2, Sri Mohd Basheer Riyaz, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.3, and perused the record. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that, she is the owner of property admeasuring 230 sq. mtrs in survey No.698 of Hanamkonda Village & Mandal, Hanamkonda District, having purchased the same with a room existing therein bearing Door No.151469/30; that intending to construct a new building therein she had demolished the existing structure and made an application to the 2nd respondent on 26.07.2022 through TS bPASS online process; and that on obtaining the instant approval, the officials of the 2nd respondent have undertaken post verification of the site on 10.08.2022 and issued letter for commencement of work on the same day. 2 3. Petitioner further contends that on obtaining instant approval on 26.07.2022 and thereafter being issued with letter for commencement of work on 10.08.2022, she had commenced construction of the residential building on the basis of the aforesaid building permission obtained. 4. Petitioner further contends that while the matter stood thus, the 3rd respondent had made a representation to the 2nd respondent dated 27.12.2022 seeking for cancellation of building permission granted in her favour, on the ground that the said plot, wherein the petitioner had commenced construction on the basis of the building permission issued by the 2nd respondentauthority, claiming to have been purchased by him to an extent of 366 sq. yards and forming part of survey 701(old) 701/A/A/1/1 (new) situated at Hanamkonda Revenue Village, Hanamkonda from one T. Shyam S/o Venkat Narayana under a registered Sale Deed, dt.11.03.2022; and that the civil suit filed by the petitioner vide O.S. No.1186 of 2009 against the said vendor of the 3rd respondent for injunction having been dismissed, the building permission obtained by her is by suppression of the fact of dismissal of the suit and by misrepresenting that the said plot of land falls in survey No.698. 3 5. Petitioner further contends that the 2nd respondent, on receiving the aforesaid representation from the 3rd respondent, had issued showcause notice calling for an explanation from her within seven (7) days from the date of receipt of the said notice, without even verifying the correctness or otherwise of the claim made by the 3rd respondent by the letter submitted. 6. Petitioner further contends that though said notice is undated and mentions the month as December, 2022, the said notice has been served on her on 07.01.2023; and that she had submitted a detailed explanation denying the allegations made in the notice. 7. Petitioner further contends that the 2nd respondent authority without considering the representation/reply submitted by her to the showcause notice, had passed the impugned order dt.18.02.2023, cancelling the building permission granted in her favour, on the ground that the same has been obtained by fraudulent method. 8. Petitioner further contends that since, there is no remedy available to her against the aforesaid proceeding issued by the 2nd respondent, the present writ petition is filed impugning the said proceeding issued. 4 9. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent would submit that the petitioner had obtained building permission through TSbPASS online process claiming that the subject plot admeasuring 275 sq. yards as falling in survey No.698 of Hanamkonda Village, Kazipet, Hanamkonda Mandal, is by suppressing the fact of her filing a suit against the 3rd respondent's vendor vide O.S. No.1186 of 2009, wherein as per the survey report of the Assistant Director, Survey & Land Records, submitted through the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Court, the subject land was found to be as falling in survey No.701 of Hanamkonda Village and thus the said suit having been dismissed vide judgment and decree dt.16.12.2019. 10. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that even after being unsuccessful in the suit filed by her, the petitioner had obtained building permission in respect of the very same subject property by mentioning the same to be located in survey No.698 of Hanamkonda Village, and since, the petitioner had supp