Telangana High Court suggests tribunal for illegal construction disputes

The Telangana High Court suggested setting up a specialised tribunal to handle disputes relating to illegal constructions, building permissions and demolition proceedings, noting that numerous such cases were pending before the court and could be resolved more efficiently through a dedicated forum

Hyderabad: Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin of the Telangana High Court on Thursday suggested the establishment of a specialised tribunal to deal with disputes relating to illegal constructions and demolition proceedings while hearing a writ appeal filed by Srinivas Yadav of Habsiguda and DE Nagaraju of Malakpet.

The appeal was filed challenging the order of a single judge who had dismissed their petition against building permission granted by the municipal authorities on October 10. The petitioners had earlier approached the High Court questioning the grant of building permission and the subsequent proceedings issued under Section 450 of the GHMC Act seeking cancellation of the permission.

---

However, the single judge had dismissed the petition, observing that the municipal commissioner had granted the building permit only after verifying the title and rights over the subject property and that the petitioners had failed to place proper material to justify cancellation of the permission.

During the hearing of the appeal, the Division Bench observed that a large number of cases relating to illegal constructions, building permissions and demolition actions are presently pending before the High Court. The Bench was of the view that such disputes could be resolved more efficiently if a dedicated tribunal is constituted.

The Court observed that constitution of a tribunal comprising a presiding officer along with a technical member would enable faster adjudication of matters relating to building construction permissions and demolition disputes.

The Chief Justice-led Bench requested the Advocate General to bring the issue to the notice of the State government and examine the feasibility of establishing such a tribunal to deal with such cases.

Responding to the Court’s suggestion, the Advocate General informed the Bench that he would discuss the matter with the government and place its response before the Court. The Bench adjourned the matter to April 15 for further hearing.