Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has directed GHMC to immediately seal unauthorized structural seals, if they are found to be a construction that violates the building permit, and previously issued a display notice until further inquiry. The court said this would take a serious view of any violation of the GHMC order and could even be regarded as contempt for the court.
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court issued an order every day to several petitions that flooded the court, complaining about GHMC's inaction to complain about unauthorized and illegal construction and deviations from the approved plan.
The court ruled that GHMC staff did nothing until the unauthorized building was raised to three to four levels, although complaints were received regarding such structures even during the stage of excavating the foundation pit. In some cases, the court found that the GHMC authorities were issuing display notices but did not initiate further action. When the complainant requested action, GHMC staff said they were awaiting a reply to the notice. At the same time, violators will complete the construction project.
After a large number of cases before the High Court, Justice Vijason Reddy believes that in addition to issuing display notices, unauthorized parts of construction should also be stopped immediately. Unauthorized parts should be sealed or the builder will continue to build and complete the work.
The judge also noted that in many other cases, GHMC machinery issued a display notice and sent a 15-day response to the alleged offender. The judge noted that the court failed to understand why immediate measures were not taken immediately, and when a notice of representation was issued, the construction work or sealing unauthorized parts were established under Section 461-A of the GHMC Act.
In some cases, the court was surprised to note that even after the notice was issued, the violators continued to carry out unauthorized construction without worrying about the law, as there seemed to be no deterrence and fear of demolition.
Judge Vijaysen Reddy also said the link between the owners and builders, local politicians and GHMC officials cannot be ruled out.
He explained that the LF building was granted permission to allow G+2 floors, and officials found that other unauthorized floors were built and they should issue display notices and seal the unauthorized floors at the same time. Only this will largely curb the unhealthy trends in unauthorized construction. It is ridiculous and difficult to understand that it is only for convenience to issue a notice of demonstration and then through demolition/speaking orders while allowing the owner/builder to continue unauthorized construction.
The judge directed the GHMC Commissioner to issue a notice to the GHMC staff to seal buildings with deviations or authorized in any way.
These instructions were issued in a petition filed by Jijjuvarapu Ramesh, who complained that GHMC did nothing to do to unauthorized construction of unauthorized floor + four floors + four floors and lofts, plot 555, OU Colony, Shaikpet. The petition says the builder has obtained permission to stilts and two floors, but has built the third, fourth and fifth floors and another sixth floor loft. Authorities did not take action until the building was completed.
When Ramesh approached the High Court, GHMC's permanent adviser Arun Kumar Midde proposed that a display notice of 28.04.2025 had been issued and the speech order was passed within 15 days. The court questioned why GHMC had to wait for a few days and why it did not take action immediately after receiving the complaint. The court immediately issued instructions to seal the building.
The judge had earlier in his issuing the order instructed the GHMC Commissioner to give directions to the Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Urban Planner and Town Planning Officer in this regard and issued a notice directing all employees to follow it.
To this end, the GHMC Commissioner issued a notice to direct officials to comply with the instructions to seal unauthorized structures after issuing a display notice. The GHMC Commissioner placed the circular in the High Court, saying that the inaction of GHMC staff would be considered serious, even to the extent of the court's contempt.
