The High Court · 2025

Judgment

4. The Sub-Registrar, Serilingampalli, Ranga Reddy District. The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad The.State of Telangana, rep. by Principal Secretary, Revenue -(Stamps and Registration Department Secretariat, Hyderabad. - The Telangana State Waqf Board, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Haj House, Nampally, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the refusal of registration orders passed by the 1st respondent in Refusal Order No.1, 2 and 3 of 2025, daled 2110112025 relating to the sale deeds bearing pending document Nos.471 , 472 and 473 of 2024, daled 2311212024 concerning the part of the land in Sy.No.250 of Manikonda Jagir village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to th6 law laid down by the Supreme Court of lndia in 2022 SCC ONLINE SC 159 and also for the reason that there is no waqf gazette notification covering the subject land situated in Sy.No.250 of Manikonda Jagir village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and resultantly set aside the said refusal orders and consequently direct the 1st respondent to forthwith register and release the pending sale cleeds referred above to the petitioner after due registration. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in srrpport of the petition, the High court. may be pleased to direct the 1st respondent to forthwith register the sale deeds executed and presented by the petitioner bearing P.Nos.471, 472 and 473 of 2024 dated 23.12.2024 and release the registered sale deed to the petitioner, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : M/S BHARADWAJ ASSOCIATES Counsel for Respondents No.1to3:ASST.Gp FOR STAMpS& REGISTRATION Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI FARHAN AZAM KHAN, SC FOR WAKF The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.4764 of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is hled seeking the following prayer: "to declare refusal of registration orders passed bg the 7't respondent in Refusal Order Nos.1, 2 and 3 of 2025, dated 21.01.2025 relating to the sale deeds. bearing pendirLg document Nos.471, 472 and 473 of 2024, dated 23.12.2024 concerning the part of the land in Sg.No.2SO of Manikonda Jagir uillage, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddg District as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the latt laid d"own by the Supreme Court of India in 2022 SCC ONLINE SC 159 and also for the reason that there is no u.taqf gazette notification couerirLg the subject- land situated in Sg.No.2SO of Manikonda Jagir uillage, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddg Distict and resultantlg set aside tLte said refusal orders qnd consequently direct the 7"t respondent to fortlttaith register and release the pending sale deeds referred aboue to tLLe petitioner afier due re gistration. " NVSK,J W.P.Nc.4764 of 2025 2 2 Heard Sjri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learn,::d sen10r counsel for :Sri Ch. Lakshman Kumar, learnecl counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned \ssistant Government pleader for Stamps ald Registration appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Farhan Azarn Khan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4. perused the recorll.

3. Facts in brief are as follows: Petitioner is a private limited comparri/ being represented b,g its authorized ofhcer submits that they are the lawful owners and had executed three (3) sale deeds dated 23. 12.i,O24 in respect of small extents of lands situated in Sy No.25O of Manikona Jagir village, Gandipet Mandal, RangzL Reddy District in favour of prorspective purchasers and presented the said three (3) sale dr:eds for registration before respondent No. 1 after due payment of the stamp duty and registration fee. It is their case that the said three 13) sale deeds were given pending doi:ument numbers viz., p 47 L / 2024, p_422 /2024 and p_473 / 2024, t.]l/SK,J w.P.No-4764 of 2025 3 all are dated 23.12.2024 and the registration of the said pending sale deeds were refused by the impugned refusal orders bearing Nos.1, 2 and 3 of 2025, all are dated

21.OL.2025 respectively on the following grounds: "As seen from the prohibited propertg list of this office, the soid Surueg Number 25O part of Manikonda Jagir uillage ls prohibited fo, registration under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 19O8 as per Chief Exeantiue Officer, A.P. State Waqf Board Letter No.93/LR/(a)/RR/2OO7 dated 1O.12.2OO4." Aggrieved by the said orders, petitioner frled the present writ petition.

4. Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned refusal orders rejecting to register the aforesaid three pending sale deeds is contra4r to the law laid down by the Hon1cle Apex Court in case of State of Andhra Pradesh (Nout State of Telangana) a. A.P. Stqte Wqq.f Board NVSK,J W.P.No.4764 of 2025 4 qnd othersr wherein the Hon,ble Apex Court has held that the lancls in I\4anikonda Jagir village are l)ot Waqf lands at all and by virtue of the said order, the irnpugned refusal orders of respondent No.1 are unsusta:nable in

5. In supprtrt of his contention learned senior counsel draws attenti,cn of this Court with regard to the three (3) refusa-l order,s bearing Nos.l, 2 and,3 of 2025, a_11 are dated 21.O1 .2025, wherein the Sub-Registrar, Serilingampally / respondent No.1 refused the sz,dd three (3) sale deecls stating that from the prohibited properties list, the saicL lald in Sy.No.250 part of Manikonda Jagir village is prohibited for registration under Section 22-A of Registration A.ct, 1908 as per the Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad letter bearing No.93 / La I (a) 7'RR/ 2OO7, dated lo.t2.2ot4. ' 2022 scc oNLINII sc 159 NVSK,J w.P.No.4764 of 2025 5

6. Learned senior counsel also draws attention to the three proceedings issued by the ZonaT Offtcer, HMDA, Serilingampally vide proceedings bearing Nos.458/LRS/ zo-sKP/HMDA/2013, 4s9 ILRS/ZO-SKPIHMDAI 2Ot3 and 460lLRS/ZO-SKP/HMDA/2013, aI1 are dated

08.01.2013 for regularization of unapproved layouts / Plot Nos.212 and 213 of Sy.Nos.250/Part and 251/Part respectively situated at Manikonda Jagrr village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, subject iands in question, wherein regularization orders were issued in respect of the aforesaid un-approved layouts.

7. Learned senior counsel further submits that the State of Andhra Pradesh (Now State of Telalgana) had filed appeals against the orders passed by the High Court of Judicature, Hyderabad on O3.O4.2O12 in W.P.Nos.6 1 48, 17 192, 2037 2, 20614, 2357 8 and 281 12 ol 2OO7 and 4515 of 2008, whereby the writ petitioner challenged the Errata Notihcation dated 13.03.2006, published in the Offrcial Gazettee of the State of Andhra NVSK,J w.P. 1o.4764 ot 2O2S -) 6 Pradesh on 06.04.2006 on behalf of Andhra pradesh Wakf Board, werc dismissed. He would further submit that the subject survey numbers are paft of sald Errata Notification and the Honble Apex Court has allowed the civil Appeal:r and the operative portion of the sar.d order is extracted for the sake of facility: "794. In uieuL of the aboue, tDe pass the foilowing order: i) The tliuil Appeals are allowed. The orders pas.;ed bg the High Court are set asid.e. ii) The Errata notification d.oted. 13.3.20Ct6 is qua:;hed. The Land. ad.measuring 1654 A.cres and 32 guntas uest with the State and/ or Cor1toy511isn free from anA encumbrance. ili) In terms of Section 1O(2)(i) of the Commutcttion Regl.ation, 9O% of the gross basic sum referred to in Section 4 of the Commutation Regt,.lation is pagable to the Dargah. The arre(vs shall be calculated. and. paid. to the Dargo,h within 6 months." Learned senirtr counsel further submits that since the said Errata Nrttification dated 13.03.2006 is quashed and NVSK,J W.P.No-4764 of 2O2S 7 the said lands are no more Waqf lands, as such, the reasons stated in the impugned refusal orders in terms of the orders passed by the Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Waqf Board vide Letter No.93/Lal(a)/RRl2OO7, dated: |O-12-2OI4 are ex facie illegal and eventually he would pray to allow the Writ Petition and direct the respondents to register a,ll the documents and confines the prayer only to the extent of registration.

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while allowing the Civil Appeal Nos.10771, LO772 arrd LO774 of 2016 at Paragraph No. 195 held as follows: "795. These appeals are on behalf of alleged tenants or pattadars uftder the jagirdar. It has been asserted that theg started paging rent to the State afier abolition of jagirs and claim possession on some part of the land which is now part of the impugned Enqta Notification. The arguments rqised bg the appellants haue been incorporated in the main judgment. For the reasons recorded aboue, the appellants are at libertg to seek remedg for tlrc redressal of their 8 gneuanLces before ctccordonce lau. accordt ttgly disposed of. NVSK,J W .P.\o.4764 of 2O2S appropriate forun These appeals Qre

9. Per contra, learned Assistant Governmer.t pleader for Stamps ald Registration appearing for rc:spondent Nos. 1 to 3 srrpports the refusal orders, dated 21.O1 .2025. Learned Assistant Government pleader has plact,:d written instructions, dated 17.O2.2025 of the Sub_l?egistrar, Serilingmpallv / respondent No. 1, which reads ar; under: "I qm to submit that the petition herein filed. a urit petition through No. 4764 of 2025 in the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature, Telangana at Hgderabad in respect of registration of 59.No.2.10 of Manikond.a Jagir Village, Gana|ipet Manda| Ranga Reddg District. Ftttlher I am to submit that the sald Sr; ny'o 25O of Manikonda Jagir Village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Redd.g Distict is prohibited for Registratton under Section 22_A of Registration Act 190,8 as per Chief Executiue Oljlcer .,1.p. Stote Vlakf Board. Hgd.erabad., Letter ly'o. NVSK,J W.P.No.4764 ol 2025 9 93/ L4/ (a)/ RR/ 20O7, Dated: 10-12-2014 addressed to the Commissioner and Inspector General, Registration & Stamps, Telangana, Hyderabad."

10. The Honble Supreme Court vide order dated O7.O2.2O22 allowed the Civil Appeals and quashed the Errata Notihcation, dated 13.03.2006, and held that land admeasuring 1654 acres 32 gunts vest with the State andlor Corporation free from any encumbrance. By virtue of the said order the A.P. State Waqf Board cannot claim any rights on the subject property in the present wflt petrtron.

11. It is to be noted that in the said order, the Honble Supreme Court clarifred that the Government has absolute right on the said property and also granted Iiberty to the parties therein in Civil Appeal Nos. 10771, 10772 and IO774 of 2016 to seek remedy for redressal of their grievance before any appropriate forum, 1n accordance with law. NVSK,J W.P.N r.4764 of 2O2S t0

12. Therefcrre, by virtue of quashing tht: Errata Notilrcation clated 13.03.2006, in which the p.titioner,s lands are claimed and by declaration that thr: subject lands vest ,with the Government, the submis;sions of learned seni,lr counsel appears to be misconceived and same cannot be considered in the right perspective. The petitioner being private party has no right o;.interest over the subfect property. It is further to be n.ted that the petitioner- has, f,rled any document / sale, deed in support ofth"i. title. However, a reference is takr:n to the registered sale deeds of their vendors in the recitals made in the sale ,leed. Having considered the subrnissions made by the tearned senior counsel, this Court rleems it appropriate that the petitioner and its vendors c:raim on the property rlannot be sourced in this writ uetition. Therefore, in ;rbsence of the same and in the light of the Honble Supr,:me Court order, dated 07.02.20.22, the prayer sought in the present writ petition is not sustainable and no Mandamus can be issued under Srot NVSK,J w.P-No.4764 of 2025 1l Article 226 of Constitution of India, directing the Sub- Registrar, Serilingampally / respondent No' 1 for registering the a-foresaid three sale deeds. For the reasons stated above, this writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed.

13. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. \ To, //TRUE COPYII SD/.P. PADMANABH DEPUTY DDY ISTRAR SECTION FFlCER

1. One CC to M/S BHARADWAJ ASSOCIATES, Advocate. [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR STAIUPS AND REGISTRATION, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

3. One CC to SRI FARHAN AZAM KHAN, SC FOR WAKF BoARD. TOPUCI 4. Two CD Copies. BSK BS HIGH COURT DATED:0'l10412025 ORDER WP.No.4764 of 2025 :il,i i s t 0/ AiB 2!25 t + ) .L \ a^ .;^4 r6trt.! --=r' DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS