HYDERABAD: With exasperation writ large, Justice B Vijayasen Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Monday came down heavily on municipal authorities for their repeated failure to curb unauthorised constructions, remarking caustically that “even God cannot set them right”.
Justice Reddy, hearing a petition against a demolition notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Chandanagar Circle under Section 462 of the GHMC Act, 1955, minced no words in exposing the hollowness of municipal enforcement mechanisms.
The court observed that illegal multi-storey buildings mushroom under the very noses of municipal staff while they remain indifferent. “Only after the illegal structures are complete do these officials suddenly wake up, rushing to demolish them in a mock display of duty,” the judge remarked, the exasperation unmistakable.
Turning sharply towards the counsel for the municipal authorities, the court posed a blunt question: “What exactly do the municipal officials do for months while such constructions come up? Do the area inspectors wear blindfolds?” Justice Reddy pointedly reminded that the GHMC Act under Section 461 empowers officials to seize such unauthorised constructions in the early stages itself. “Why don’t they act then?” he questioned.
The court decried the dismal pattern of inaction, where authorities stir only after a citizen approaches the court, forcing judicial intervention. “By the time these ‘speaking orders’ are issued, the illegal structure stands tall and complete. Only then begins the demolition drama, staged for effect,” Justice Reddy said, his irritation barely concealed.
The bench also took note of the surge in unauthorised buildings across Telangana and laid the blame squarely on municipal inaction. “Curiously, these buildings remain invisible during construction but magically become visible when it’s time to collect taxes,” the judge remarked, exposing the convenient double standards at play.
The judge was hearing a petition filed by K Raghuveer Achari, a resident of Guttala Begumpet in Serilingampally mandal, Rangareddy district, who challenged the demolition notice served under the GHMC Act. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the notice was arbitrary and illegal, seeking a stay on coercive measures until authorities decide on the application filed under the Building Regularisation Scheme (BRS).
After hearing both sides and examining the documents, the court directed that the status quo be maintained until the application for regularisation is disposed of. It also instructed the respondents to file a counter-affidavit and posted the matter for further hearing on July 15.