Telangana High Court
Syed Bhadroddin , Bader Pasha vs The State Of Telangana on 15 September, 2025
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
I.A.Nos.1 of 2022, 2 and 4 of 2023
In/And
WRIT PETITION No.26994 OF 2021
O R D E R:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-
"... to issue a Writ order or orders, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the impugned Order in Case No.B/Spl.Tribunal/Gajwel/39/2021 dated 30-07-2021 dismissing the appeal on the ground that the subject property is a Wakf Property is arbitrary, illegal and also in violation of provisions contemplated under Andhra Pradesh Rights in Lands and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and new Act 2020 and quash the same and to pass any other order or orders..."
2. Heard Mr.Mohd. Asifuddin, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.H.Rakesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, Mr.MD.Tameezuddin Ahmed, learned counsel for respondent No.5 and Mr.A.Najeeb Khan, learned counsel for proposed respondent No.6.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the owner of land admeasuring Acs.10-32 guntas in Survey No.766 situated at Gajwel Town and Mandal, Siddipet District (herein after called as 'the subject property'); that the subject property consists of Acs.5-37 guntas out of Acs.10-32 guntas situated at Gajwel Village and Mandal; that the above said land is an Inam Land gifted by one Deshmukh Raja Uma Reddy to the petitioner's 2 great grandfather namely Syed Khader Pasha in the year 1908; that the same was reflected in Khasra Pahani and Sethwar from 1954 to 2005; that subsequently the petitioner's grandfather Syed Shah Ali Peeran succeeded the same; that later, the petitioner's father Syed Ahmed Pasha who worked as Urdu Typist in High Court of Andhra Pradesh, succeeded the property vide partition deed dated 27-04-1961 and obtained Acs.10-32 guntas of land out of Acs.17-00 guntas; that basing on the said partition the petitioner's father was enjoying the same as absolute owner and his name was recorded in the revenue records; that thereupon, the petitioner along with his family members inherited the property pursuant to succession and a cheque bearing No.197477 dated 08-08-2010 was issued to him towards compensation of cultivation; that in the year 2005 some persons in collusion with the revenue officials changed the entries in revenue records without issuing any notice to the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner made an application to the revenue authorities seeking to delete the names of unknown persons and to rectify the record. Whileso, respondent No.5 taking advantage of his name by its close resemblance with that of the petitioner's father, got mutated the subject land of Acs.5- 37 guntas out of Acs.10-32 guntas in his name; that on knowing 3 about the same, the petitioner also filed an Appeal before respondent no.3 seeking to set aside the mutation in respect of schedule property in Sy.No.766 to an extent of land admeasuring Acs.5-37 guntas, to direct the official respondents to effect the rectification and restore the revenue entries bearing Appeal No. B/684/2020; that the respondent No.5 played fraud and thereby succeeded in getting the Rythu Bandhu and cheated the Government; that during the pendency of the Appeal the revenue Tribunals have emerged pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.4 Rev. (Assgn-1) department dated 12-01-2021. Thereupon, the same is transferred to respondent No.2 and renumbered as B/Spl.Tribunal/Gajwel/39/2021, wherein the Tribunal without issuing any notice to the petitioner passed the order dated 08-02-2021. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner made an application for reopening the case in view of orders passed by this Court in W.P.(PIL).No 20 of 2021 along with the written arguments. Later, on 30-07-2021, the Tribunal had passed the impugned order without considering the written arguments submitted by the petitioner along with all the supporting documents upholding the earlier order by dismissing my Appeal stating that the subject land is notified as Wakf Property. 4 Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner by filing I.A.No.2 of 2023 submits that during the pendency of the Writ Petition he obtained relevant records of the subject property from Mee-Seva and came to know that the names of Naini Narsimulu was reflected in Survey No.766/A1A/2 in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.0-01 guntas, Belda Shankar was reflected in Survey No.766/A1A/1/2 in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.0-03 guntas and that of one Kailasa Naresh Kumar was reflected in Survey No.766/A1A/1/1/1/2 in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.0-03 guntas illegally. Therefore, for appropriate adjudication of the matter he seeks to implead the aforecited persons as proposed respondent Nos.6 to 9 in the Writ Petition as well as in I.A.s.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner by filing I.A.No.4 of 2023 seeks to implead proposed respondent Nos.6 to 11 as respondent Nos.6 to 11 in the Writ Petition as well as in I.As., by alleging that the proposed respondent Nos.6 to 11 have created forged documents which was reflected in the Encumbrance Certificate, in order to cause wrongful loss to the petitioner. 5
6. He further submits that the petitioner had filed a private complaint vide Crime No.431 of 2020 dated 05.11.2020 for the offences punishable under Section 420 r/w 34 of I.P.C. being aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos.3 to 5 in mutating the revenue records in favour of respondent No.5 by creating fabricated documents. He further states that respondent No.2 ought to have considered the fact that respondent No.5 is claiming the Rythu Bandhu; that if at all the land is a Wakf Land as per respondent No.2, respondent No.5 claiming money under Rythu Bandhu Scheme is illegal. Therefore, he seeks allow the Writ Petition.
7. Learned counsel for proposed respondent No.6 by filing I.A.No.1 of 2022 contends that he is the Mutawalli of Dargah Hazrat Syed Shah Ali Peera Khadri, Near Jama Masjid, Gajwel Village and Mandal, Siddipet District; that his forefathers were Mutawallies of the said Dargah; that he had succeeded to the Office of the Mutawalli as per Sec.42 of Waqf Act 1995; that his forefathers were performing the annual Urs of the said Dargah from time immemorial; that the said Dargah and its attached properties are registered under Waqf notified in A.P. Gazette No.46-A dated 20-12-2001, for which an addendum was issued 6 vide A.P. Gazette No.3 dated 18-01-2007; that the subject land in Survey No.766 admeasuring Acs.10-32 guntas situated at Gajwel Village and Mandal, Siddipet District, is the attached property of Dargah Hazrat Syed Shah Ali Peera Khadri and the same forms part and parcel of notified Waqf and it is the subject matter of Case No.B/SPL.Tribunal/Gajwel/39/2021; that aggrieved by the dismissal of the Case No.B/SPL.Tribunal/ Gajwel/39/2021, proposed respondent No.6 has approached this Court questioning the order of the Special Tribunal. He contends that there is every possibility that the petitioner and the Respondent No.5 may collude with each other and suppress the true facts relating to the Waqf property; that this Court vide order dated 20-12-2021 directed that any alienation of the subject property shall be subject to the final result of the Writ Petition. Therefore, he seeks to implead proposed respondent No.6 as respondent No.6 in the Writ Petition as well as in I.As.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner by filing counter to I.A.No.1 of 2022 strictly opposes the same contending that the proposed respondent No.6 had not filed any single scrap of paper to prove that he is the Muttawalli and appointed under Section 42 of the Wakf Act. He further states that the subject land is 7 patta land and does not belong to the Wakf. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss the I.A.No.1 of 2022.
9. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and learned counsel for respondent No.5 oppose the contentions of the petitioner and seek to pass appropriate orders.
10. For better understanding, the operative portion of the impugned order dated 30.07.2021 in Case No.B/Spl.Tribunal/ Gajwel/39/2021 passed by the learned Special Tribunal, Siddipet is extracted as here under:-
"On perusal of the list of wakf properties, the total land to an extent of Ac 10.32 gts in Sy.No.766 of Gajwel Village is Wakf land and it is notified in the wakf properties Vide Gazette No.46/A20/12/2001 at Sl.No.19043.
Therefore, the case is dismissed since the scheduled propery is wakf land"
11. Having regard to the submissions of all the learned counsel and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the learned Special Tribunal upon careful scrutiny of the Gazette No.46/A20/12/2001 has rightly passed the impugned order by stating that the land admeasuring Acs.10.32 gts in Sy.No.766 of Gajwel Village is Wakf land. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason or ground to 8 interfere with the impugned proceedings. Hence, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
12. Accordingly, I.A.Nos.1 of 2022, 2 of 2023 and 4 of 2023 are dismissed and the Writ Petition No.26994 of 2021 is dismissed. Needless to mention, the petitioner is granted liberty to work out the remedies as available under law. No costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ E.V.VENUGOPAL, J Date: 15.09.2025 ESP