Sveda Rehana Sultana v. 'l . State of Telangana

Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the ( ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pending disposal of the main writ pdtitioner, the petitioner herein prays that, the respondent authorities be directed not to disburse the cc)mpensation amount being awarded in respect of 208.6'l Sq.Yards out of 280 Sq.yards in premises bearing No.22-3-860, Darulshifa, opp. Alawa Sartauq-E-Mub:rrak Hyderabad Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. VIJAY PISSAY Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1&3: GP FOR LAND ACet.,lSlTlON Counsel for the Respondent No.2: AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3&4: Ms. TEJASWINI REt)Dy, SC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6&7: SRI K. KRISHNA KALYAN FOR Counsel for the Respondent No.S: - The Court made the following: ORDER SRI K. VENU M;\DHAV HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.7886 OF 2025 ORDER: Questioning the action of respondent No.3 in not considering the objections of the petitioner dated 27.O8.2024 and 11.12.2024 and not complying with the direction given by respondent No.2 in the order dated O I . I 1.2024 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct a,ll the respondents more particularly respondent No.3 not to disburse the compensation amount in respect of petitioner's property being acquired to an extent of 208.6I sq.yds., out of 280 sq.yds., in premises bearing No.22-3-860, Darulshifa, Opp.Alawa Sartauq-E-Mubarak, Hyderabad (subject property) to alybody and to deposit the same to the credit of O.S.No.355 of 2O2O on the Iile XVIII Additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the present writ petition is filed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Land Acquisition for respondent Nos.1 and 3; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.2; Ms.Tejaswini Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 and Mr.K.Krishna Kalyan, learned counsel for Mr.K.Venu Madhav, learned counsel for - respondent Nos.6 and 7

3. The petitioner's case is that petition:r claims to be ciwner of subject property acquired by way o I registered Gift deed from her husband uide Doc.No.1468 of 2007 dated 1,8.O9.2OO7 registered with SRO Charminar. It i,; submitted that on L4.O5.L964, one Syed Yousufunnisa Begur:r sold away the property to one Syeda Mehdi Behum Abedi, who remained unmarried and her brother Syed Sultan HussaLin inherited the property after her death. He also died on 27 .)4.1976 leaving behind Syed Ali Shabber (husband of petition,:r) as sole legal heir. Thereafter, husband of the petitioner also lied and during his life time he executed registered Gift deed in her favour and her name was also recorded as owner in GHMC : ecords.

4. It is submitted that when respondent rlos.S to 7 were trying to interlere with the petitioner's property petitioner filed O.S.No.534 of 2019 on the file of VIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and during the penderrcy of the suit, petitioner was dispossessed. Thereafter, petit oner has filed another suit in O.S.No.355 of 2O2O on the file of KVIII Additional - ::3:: Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to declare the sale deeds dated 12.06.1980 in favour of respondent No.S in respect of suit schedule property is not binding on the petitioner and declare the petitioner as owner of the subject property and for other reliefs, however, the same is pending for adjudication. Subsequently, respondent Nos.1 to 4 issued notification dated

31.07.2024 that properties on Darulshifa road were being required. Accordingly, petitioner gave representations on

27.O8.2O24 and 11.12.2024 to respondent No.4 bringing to his notice about the pendency of the suits with regard to the title of the subject property. Respondent No.3 passed an order on

01.11.2024 stating that the submissions of the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 to 7 would be considered at the time of passing of award.

5. Thereafter, respondent No.2 issued a notification which was published in Gazette on 16. 1 1.2024 proposing to acquire lands for Metro Rail Phase II, MGBS to Chandrayangutta 1n Corridor VI of Hyderabad Airport Metro Limited under Act 3O of 2013 arrd the petitioner narne was shown as item No.2O and the subject land was acquired. Respondent No.4 issued notice 4 calling for objections ald in pursuant to t he said notice, personal hearing was conducted and accorc ingiy petitioner appeared before respondent No.4 and stated :hat respondent Nos.S to 7 have created documents and agreed for the compensation being awarded by respondent Nos.l to 4 Petitioner Iiled objections stating that propertf is worth more than the compensation granted under consent award and that once the compensation 1S paid to respondeet Nos.5 to 7, petitioner cannot recover the same and in that rt:gard filed a suit in O.S.No.355 of 2O2O on the lile of XVIII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. It is further submitted that respondent No.3, ignoring the request of the pe l.itioner, is likely to disburse the compensation amount in favour of respondent Nos.5 to 7. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is

6. The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Hyderabad Airport Metro RaiI Limited has pl,rced a copy of instructions through learned Assistant Governnrent Pleader for Land Acquisition and would submit that after th,;rough scrutiny of the claims and objections, it was observed thet, there is civil \ - \ t ::5:: dispute pending between the parties i.e., Idara-E-Alia Jamia-E- Uloom-E-Hyderi and Smt.Syeda Rehana Sultana w/o.Late Syed Ali Shabbir in O.S.No.534 of 2Ot9 and O.S.No.355 of 2O2O before the City Civil Court, Hyderabad over the subject property. Hence, the consent has not been taken from any of the party and it has been informed to both the parties that the compensation of the land being acquired for Metro Rail will be deposited before the R&R Authority since there is title dispute pending before the City Civil Court, Hyderabad and that no award is passed in this case. 7 Heard learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record. \

8. In view of the submissions made above, since there is a title and pdssession dispute on the subject property in O.S.No.355 of 2O2O and O.S.No.S 34 of 2Ot9 pending before the City Civil Court, Hyderabad and that no award has been passed till date, respondent No.3 shall consider the representations of the petitioner dated 27.08.2024 and L1.12.2O24 and also the objections of respondent Nos.5 to 7 subject to outcome of the ::6:: pending suits. It is also made clear that once th,: award amount is deposited, the respondent authorities shall corsider the same and pass appropriate orders after giving a fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to responde,-rt Nos.S to 7 in the light of the orders passed in O.S.No.53't of 2019 and O.S.No.355 of 2O2O pending before the Ci y Civii Court, Hyderabad.

9. With tl're above observations, this ,vrit petition 1S disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pendin I in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs //TRUE COPY// SD/. S.M,\LLIKARJUNA RAO APSISTANT REGISTRAR ; SECTION oFFICER Buildings, BRKR Bhavan, Hyderabad, Telangana - 5000(;3 1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, (Land Ac quisition), Secretariat 2. The District Collector, Hyderabad Telangana. 3. The Special Deputy Collector Land Acquisition, H A.tvl.L. Rasoolpura, Begumpet, Hyderabad. Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

4. The Managing Director, H.A.M.L. Rasoolpura, Begumpet Hyderabad 5. One CC to SRl. VIJAY PISSAY, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR LAND ACQU|S|T|ON,High C<,urt for the State of 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court for the Slate of Telangana, at 8. One CC to Ms. TEJASWINI REDDY , STANDING COUNSEL IOPUC] 9. One CC to SRl. K. VENU MADHAV, Advocate [OPUC] '10.Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUT] BM To, W BSR 'i ( .1F. 1tlE. ==\r5la,,,:\*. "( i::. \i ) ),, \ro\ 1 3 JIJN Z0Z5 (; + ,;"/ HIGH COURT DATED:2310412025 ORDER WP.No.7886 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS n4 $