Telangana High Court
Sri K. Venodhar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana on 10 January, 2025
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Writ Petition Nos.14266, 14290, 18008, 19244, 19245,
19257, 19259, 19481, 19482, 19483, 19496, 19512,
19517, 19538, 19539, 19540, 19541, 19542, 19544,
21947, 21967, 25480, 27015 of 2023; 4065 and
7756 of 2024
COMMON ORDER:
In all these writ petitions, petitioners have questioned the action of respondents in prohibiting registrations in petitioners' plots in Sy.Nos.41/13, 41/14 and 41/14A, Khanamet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District by placing under prohibited list which is contrary to Section 22(A) of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) and also to direct official respondents to remove the subject properties from prohibitory list and permit registrations in the subject properties.
As the issue involved in all these writ petitions are common in nature, they are taken up for disposal by way of this common order, with the consent of respective parties. As a lead matter, W.P.No.14290 of 2023 is taken up. Plots owned by the petitioners in each of the writ petitions seeking for deletion of their property from prohibitory list and permit registration of their respective properties are extracted hereunder for better understanding:
2
Sl. W.P.Number Name of the petitioner Sy.No. Plot No. No.
1. 14266/2023 R.Hari Krishna 41/14A 33
2. 14290/2023 R.Asha 41/14A 32
3. 18008/2023 Tummala Sudeepika 41/14 12
4. 19244/2023 K.Manikyam 41/14 2
5. 19245/2023 Nazeer Jahan 41/14 6
6. 19257/2023 K.Chandrakala 41/14 25
7. 19259/2023 K.Kalawathi 41/14 1
8. 19496/2023 A.Satish Reddy 41/14 15
9. 19517/2023 Adarsh Maddipeta 41/14A 29
10. 19538/2023 Arja Sri Radha 41/14 23
11. 19539/2023 Anumandal Soma Reddy 41/14 16
12. 19540/2023 Somagani Nagamani 41/14 20
13. 19541/2023 N.Ashok Reddy 41/14 9
14. 19542/2023 N.Satish Reddy 41/14 10
15. 19544/2023 Kesireddy Pavan Kumar 41/14 8 Reddy
16. 21947/2023 Amilineni Padmaja 41/14A 31
17. 21967/2023 Gavva Chandra Reddy 41/14 24
18. 25480/2023 P.Phanesh Kumar 41/14 13
19. 27015/2023 Devineni Murali Krishna 41/14A 30
20. 19481/2023 K.Venodhar Reddy 41/13 12 & 23
21. 19482/2023 K.Indrasen 41/13 Ac.1-30 gts.,
22. 19483/2023 B.Lakshmi Kameshwari 41/13 1000 sq.yds., 3
23. 7756/2024 L.Laxma Reddy 41/14 17
24. 4065/2024 N.Murali 41/14 19
25. 19512/2023 K.Suvarna 41/14 27
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition in W.P.No.14290 of 2023 briefly stated are that petitioner claims to be absolute owner and possessor of plot No.32 to an extent of Ac.0-06 gts., (approx. 726 sq.yds.,) in Sy.No.41/14A in Khanamet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (briefly 'subject property' hereinafter) having purchased by way of registered sale deed from its original owner. It is submitted that originally total extent of Ac.5-00 gts., belonged to one Shahnoor Khan, who has obtained the same in Sy.No.41 through Assignment to ex-servicemen in the year 1961. Thereafter, the name of said Shahnoor Khan name was recorded in the revenue records i.e., pahanies for the year 1993-94 through Faisal Patti of Khanamet for the year 1992-
93. It is further submitted that the petitioner was in uninterrupted and peaceful possession of the subject property.
3. Subsequently, the said Shahnoor Khan through his GPA holder one K.Krishna sold an extent of Ac.3-00 gts., to 4 one K.Indrasena vide registered sale deed dated 18.05.1995 after duly obtaining approval of Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally vide letter No.A94/95 dated 05.04.1995. Thereafter, the petitioner herein has purchased an extent of Ac.0-06 gts., out of Ac.3-00 gts., in Sy.No.41/14A from the said K.Indrasena vide Doc.No.6410 of 1998 dated 19.08.1998. Thereafter, the petitioner name was also mutated in pattadar passbook vide Lr.No.E1/5294/2000 issued by Collector, Ranga Reddy District and pattadar passbook was issued to the petitioner. It is also submitted that subject property has been regulaized vide Proceedings No.LRS15032018060600 dated 15.03.2018. While so, a notice was issued to the petitioner on 15.05.2013 by the Office of Collector, Ranga Reddy which is as follows:
"The Director of Appeals, O/o.the Chief
Commissioner of Land Administration A.P.
Hyderabad vide Procgs No.T2/1001/2005 dated 09.04.2008 has issued orders permitting the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District to initiate the proceedings for cancellation of Supplementary Sethwar dated 24.07.1993 in respect of Sy.No.41/14 of Khanamet Village, Serilingampally Mandal u/s 166-B of A.P.(T.A.) L.R.Act, 1917 Fasli."
5
4. Thereafter, petitioner's property was placed in prohibited list and some of the owners of plots in Sy.No.41/14A made representations. Learned senior counsel would submit that the said proceedings in T2/1001/2005 dated 09.04.2008 had already been quashed by this Court in W.P.No.9707 of 2009 dated 14.02.2017. Thereafter, the matter was carried on appeal by the respondent authorities therein before the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.23 and 1105 of 2018, accordingly, a Division Bench of this Court on 18.01.2018 had dismissed the said appeals by upholding the order of learned Single Judge. Subsequently, matter was carried on to Hon'ble Supreme Court by way of S.L.P.(Civil) Diary Nos.29864 and 38244 of 2022. The Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, thereby confirming the ownership of the vendors of the petitioner. As such the Proc.No.T2/1001/2005 dated 09.04.2008 have been quashed and have no legal validity.
5. Mr.P.Sri Raghu Ram, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that by virtue of orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner's property has to be considered as private patta land and cannot be continued to 6 be in prohibitory list under Section 22(A) of the Act. Inspite of the above orders and legal position of the petitioners, the subject lands are placed in the prohibitory list, questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed.
6. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No.3 stating that petitioners have so far not presented any document to the registering authority and that as per the list submitted by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District vide Lr.No.E5/2825/2021 dated 29.09.2021, the land in Sy.No.41/14A situated at Khanamet Village is declared as Government land under Section 22(A)(1)(b) of Act and is prohibited for registration. It is further stated that as per provisions of Section 22(A)(2) of Act furnishing a list of prohibited properties is sufficient for the properties under clause (a) to (d) of Section 22(A) of the Act. He would further rely upon a letter dated E5/2825/2021 dated 29.09.2021 and Lr.No.B/1751/2017 dated 16.06.2017 which were issued by District Collector stating that the subject lands are declared as Government lands under Section 22(A)(1) of the Act.
7. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the very inclusion of the subject lands in the prohibitory list is 7 against the provisions of Section 22(A)(1)(b) of the Act which pertains to the immovable property owned by State or Central Government and only by way of notification the subject lands can be denied for registration as per provisions of Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Act.
8. Admittedly, no notification has been issued under Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Act. In the counter affidavit, letter No.E5/2825/2021 dated 29.09.2021 has been cited as a reason for denial of registration. This Court in W.P.No.16109 of 2024 vide order dated 19.07.2024 had set aside the letter No.E5/2825/2021 dated 29.09.2021 and allowed the said writ petition.
9. A Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.28300 of 2007 dated 19.10.2023 upheld the validity of Section 22(A)(1) and at paragraph 29 of the said order held that an aggrieved party shall approach the State Government for deletion of their property from the notification as per sub-section (4) of Section 22(A) of the Act. The said paragraph is extracted hereunder for the facility of reference:
"29. It was further held that sub-section (4) of Section 22A of the Act provides a remedy to an 8 aggrieved party to approach the State Government for deletion of his property from the notification. It has further been held that if any such application is made, the competent authority has to afford an opportunity of hearing and an opportunity to produce materials/documents in support of such a claim. The claim made by an aggrieved person has to be dealt with by a speaking order. It has further been held that in case such an application is made under Section 22A(4) of the Act, the same has to be decided within a period of three months. It has also been held that the mechanism provided under Section 22A(4) of the Act shall not preclude the parties to file any other appropriate proceeding, including civil suit, for similar or appropriate relief."
10. Subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the petitioner submits that a detailed representation has been submitted to the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District on 07.01.2025 requesting to remove the subject property from the prohibitory list. A copy of the said representation dated 07.01.2025 has been filed before this Court by way of Memo dated 08.01.2025. Learned senior counsel further submits that in the said representation the details of order passed by this Court in W.P.No.9707 of 2009 quashing the proceedings dated 09.04.2008 which were upheld in W.A.Nos.23 and 1105 9 of 2018 and as confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.(Civil) Diary Nos.29864 and 38244 of 2022 were furnished. Learned senior counsel would further submit that this Court has already set aside the letter dated E5/2825/2021 in W.P.No.16109 of 2024 dated 19.07.2024 as such there cannot be any reason for the respondent authorities to continue to put the subject property in the prohibited list. Learned senior counsel would therefore pray this Court that respondent authorities may be directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation keeping in view the orders passed by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court and an opportunity of personal hearing be given to the petitioner.
11. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that if the said representation is still pending for consideration, the respondent authorities may be directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 07.01.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
12. In view of the observations made above, this Court deems it appropriate to allow all the writ petitions to the extent of registration of subject properties in respect of plots, 10 extracted above in a tabular format, which are questioned in this batch of writ petitions and respondent authorities are directed not to further refer to the same letter in E5/2825/2021 dated 29.09.2021 for the purpose of denying registration of the subject properties. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District is directed to consider the representation dated 07.01.2025 made by the petitioners in the light of the common order passed by this Court in W.P.No.9707 of 2009 & 23913 of 2010 and W.P.No.16109 of 2024 dated 19.07.2024 and S.L.P.(Civil) Diary Nos.29864 and 38244 of 2022 for the purpose of deletion of the subject properties from the prohibitory list and pass appropriate orders, after giving a fair opportunity of hearing to all the petitioners, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly all the writ petitions are allowed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
______________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR,J 10.01.2025 mrm