The Telangana High Court has ruled in favor of public access rights in a dispute involving the restricted access to the Shadnagar gated community. The Court has authorized municipal officials to demolish a wall built by a housing developer, which had obstructed public passage. The ruling, which dismissed an appeal by the township's residents, reinforces that the interests of private gated communities should not supersede public right of way, and developers must ensure complete transparency in their dealings.
The Telangana High Court has put an end to a contentious situation caused by a residential layout developer, who constructed a barrier, effectively closing off public access to adjacent areas, citing the need for a gated community. The court has given a thumbs up to municipal authorities of Shadnagar to tear down the obstruction and restore public right of way.
The presiding bench, consisting of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N Tukaramji, declared this verdict, negating an appeal by the Sri Sai Balaji Township Welfare Society, an organization composed of the township's residents. The township's developer had obstructed the public access after gaining approval from the Directorate of Town and Country Planning (DTCP) to develop a residential project spanning 83 acres in Solipur village, part of Farooqnagar mandal, under Shadnagar municipality.
The developer's actions sparked off a series of legal skirmishes as it affected the local community and other layout developers. After a thorough examination of the case documents, the court found that the developer had not obtained the necessary municipal consent for creating the gated community.
In a previous hearing, the developer had committed to a single judge in writing that he would dismantle the offending wall post the completion of flat construction. However, after transferring ownership of the flats to the purchasers, the developer vacated the premises.
Upon discovering the encroachment on over two acres of public passage, the authorities began legal proceedings. The flat owners also raised their concerns, alleging that the developer misled them by omitting essential information.
The residents of the flats formed a society to safeguard their interests and approached the court. Nevertheless, the bench underlined the right of the public to unobstructed passage, dismissing the flat owners' society's appeal. The court stated that any grievances the flat owners have against the developer should be addressed in a different legal forum.
In conclusion, this case underscores the importance of ensuring public passage and maintaining transparency in real estate transactions. The judgement reiterates that the rights of the larger public cannot be sacrificed for private interests and sets a significant precedent for future situations of a similar nature.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
