High Court · 2025

1. Smt.Mallika Begum' (Died per LR)Wife oj late Mr'Mohd'Mohiu4n' Aged ' io""li a7 v"fi:bcb,);;i;nl-irori'"*ii", Resident of H'No'23-1-226' Alijah 2. Nawab Mohammed Waheeduddin, S/o: Late-Mohammed Mohiuddin' aged - ,u6l]-oz i"Jrs, oc.''b]riin"ss,-nyb H.t'to.tt -5-152tD, Red Hills' Khairtabad' 3. Smt. Shaila Begum, Wo: Late Mohd Fareeduddin' aoed about 62 Years' occ: Householo nyo n.iio.il-z-aCeii Hlturadnagar' AJif Nagar' Hyderabad 500028. 4. Nawab Mohammed Naseeruddin, S/o: La-te Mohd Fareeduddin aged about 40 years, occ: eusinelJ,--Rj6- A'-l-iOi,ier, Gulshan colony, Tolichowki, Golconda HYderabad- 500008.

5. Janaba Nuzhathjehan, D/o: Late Nawab Mohd. Fareeduddin' aged.about 36 -ivo - g'rlo'rz-z-aaa/3' Muradnagar' Asif Nagar' Years, occ: nor""i"ii,ri', Hyderabad - 500028.

6. Nawab Mohammed Najamuddin, S/o: Late.Mohd Fareeduddin ' age^9 a'bout Shaikpet 33 Years, occ: ausineii'iv" n'ito'a-t7atN127' samatha colony ' , Hyderabad - 500008' 7. Janaba Sayeed Unnisa Begum, D/o Late Malika Jehan Begum' aged about ' 6;'Y;;;'oti Hoir".lnlid,- nvo n't'to'zo-4-e73noA' shah Guni chowk' Charminar, HYderabad-500002' ( Petitioner Nos. 2 to 7 are brought 9l le^cgggs Lrs' Of deceased Petitioner Vide lA No'1 of 2024 in No.'l as per court" bt;t-a;EA- WP.No.19033 ol2023) 'z'oz'zozq' AND 1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal pe-c-rgtgry^' Revenue ' D;r-,ffi;"t secieliriit Buiidina,s, Hvderabad- 500 063' 2. The District Collector, lntegratgd-Distri^ct Office Complex' Anthaipally' Medchal - Narita;giri District, Pin code . 5000 078' ...PETITIONERS g. I|g Q'gtdc! Registrar and Stamps, Opp . Medchal Road, Near RELTANCE SMART POlflT, NGOs Colony, Medchal, Hyderabad 501 401

4. The Sub-Regrstrar, Kukatpally S.R.O., Moosapet, Hyderabad -S00 Oi8. '5. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Malkajgiri Division, Medchal Malkajgiri District Pin Code 500 094.

6. The Tahsildar', Kukatpally Mandal, Kukatpally, Hyderabad - s(to 072. ...RESPONDENTS Petition underr 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 writ, order or direction, more particularly one n the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the second Respondent-District collector in not considering the petitioner application dated 21t06t2023 for setting aside the Gazettee Notification under File No.E5l4T3ll20l3lBalanagarlHvdernagar daled 261912013 by deleting the land to an extent of Ac.27 4.'.13 Gts in Survey No.57 of Shamshiguda Village, Kukatpally Mandal, It/edchal t\/alkajgiri District from the List of prohibited properties by implementing the c rders of the Hon'ble supreme court dated 01lo\l2o22 in S.L.P. (Civil) Diary No.2760 of 2022 and dated 2JtOBl2O22 in Civil Appeal . No.57B4 of 2022 or S.L.P.(Civit) No. 7015 of 2022 is iltegal, c,ontrary to law, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14 and 300- of constitution of lndia and consequenfly direct the Respon,Jent authorities to permit the purchasers under Final Decree proceedings in c.s.No.7 of 1g5B for registration by recorJing their names in Dharani. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Gazettee Notification under Petition unde' section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petition, the High court ma), be pleased to suspend File No.E5147311201 3/Berlanagar/Hydernagar dated 26t9t2013 by deteting the otand to an extent of A':274-33 Gts in survey No.57 of Shamshiguda viilage, Kukatpally Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District from the List of prohibited Properties by permitting the purchasers under Finar Decree proceedings in c.S.No.7 of 1958 for registration pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI B'V' RAJU' REPRESENTING M/S. S. SUDEEPTHT Counsel for the Respondents: ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following: ORDER THE IIONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KI,MAR trI.P. No.19033 of 2023 ORDER: (Per the tlotble Sn Justlce N.V. Shrauan Kumar) Learned counsel Mr. B.V. Raju, representing the learned counsel S.Sudt:r:pthi appearing for the petitioners on record. Learned ,\dditional Advocate General for the responclents. Kukatpally Man.1al, This *'rit lretition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the acti,n of the respondent No.2, District Collector, in not considering the petitioner,s application dated 27.06.202!; for setting aside the Gazette Notification under File No.ES1!t: 73]/2O131 Balanagar/ Hyd(r.-nagar, da1ed 26.09.2O13 by deleting the land to an extent of Acs.2 i,4.33 guntas in Sy.No.S7 of Shamshigr.rda village, Medchal Malkajgiri District from the list of by implementing the orders of t he Hon,ble Suprcme Court rlated 01.O8.2O22 in SLp (Civil) Diary No.27.6 O ol 2022 and dated 23.Ott.2O22 in Civil Appeal No.5784 of 2022 @ SLp (Civil) No.7O15 of 2O2,.! as illegal and arbitrary and consequenfly to direct the respondent authorities to permit the purchasers r-tncler final decree proceedings in C.S No.7 of 1958 for registration bv recording prohibited prope rties their namcs in D -rarani. I '.. 2 w.P No r9o33 o12023

2. Brief facts of the case are that the pelitioner's father Sri Nawab Moin-ud-Dowla claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of several lands, including the purchased Patta Land to an extent of Ac.274.33 guntas in Survey No'57 (o1d survey No'274)' situated at Shamshiguda Village, Kukatpally Mandal' Medchal Malkaj giri District' his titte and possession is confirmed vide Original Sethwar and Khasra Pahani for the year 1954-55' When there was a boundary dispute arose between two Villages of Shamshiguda and Kukatpally' The Duwwam Taluq , Western Taluq' Hyderabad District settied the said dispute vide Proceedings under File No'GI/216/55' dated02.ll.lg56.inthesaidProceedings,thetableofoldsurvey numbers and new survey numbers with area pertaining to the Shamshiguda Village in respect of Survey No 57' old Survey number is 274. As per the succession proceedings passed by the Nizam Atiyat under File No.A/46 No' 162, dated' 24 'll'1859' declared the petitioner and 20 others as legal heirs of the deceased Sri Nawab Moin-ud-Dowla Bahadur. The said legal heirs hled suit for partition case No'13O of 1953 which was later transferred to this Court due to the higher valuation, which was accordingly renumbered as Civil Suit No 7 of 1958 (C.S.No. 7 llg58) in respect of the several lands in and around Hyderabad including the land to an extent of Acs'274 '33 gts' ' in Sy.No.S7 (old Sy.No 274), situated at Shamshiguda village' Kukatpally Mandal, Medchal Malkaj giri District and this Court by order dated O6hry1959 passed the preliminary decree in C'S' No 7 of 1958' I 3 I]AC,J&NVSK,J w i). No 19033 0f2023 The lands rn Shamshiguda village pertains to Item Nc,.252 in the Schedule A' apF,ended to the preliminary decree.

3. It is fur.ther submitted that the respondent No.2, District Collector, norirled the said land under Section 22-A( 1)(a) of the Registration A<:r., 1908 for prohibition by Notification bearing File No.ES / a731 l2O 13/Balanagar/ Hyderguda, dated 26.09.2)t3and the same was publisl-red in the Ranga Reddy Distric t Gazettt:e, which is impugned nolilcation. This Court by order dated 19.09.2013 in Application No.rl37 of 2o13 in c.S No.7 of 1958 passed Finar Decree in favour of one ll/s. Anish Construction Company and My palace Mulually Aided (lo operative Society, who are alleged to be purchasers from Lhe De,:rc: Flolders/legal heirs of the said deceased Sri Nawab Moin-Ud-Dotvla Bahadur in respect of the land to an extent of Acs.92.56 Cen!:l out of Ac.224.33 guntas in Surver. No.57 of Shamshigudrt \/illage. Thereafter, the State of Telanga::ra with an abnormal delar'. questioned the above said Final Decree dated 19 09.2013 beftr'e this court by filing a petition i, I.A N,r.2 or 2076 and LA No.2 o1 2Ol7 in OSR (SR) No.3744 of 2Ol4 and a Division Bench of this C<rurt dismissed the same by an order dated 22.12.2O2O and the same hzLs become final. Thereafter, one Mr. B.IVIahesh and others with a difi'erent claim rrled I.A No.S of 2o2o to recafl the order dated 19.o9.201ir in Application No.837 of 2013 in c.S.No.7 of 1958 and a Division Eie:nch of this Court allowed the said application by an order dated 2l.)9.2021. Aggrieved by the same, th(: State of 4 w.P No r9o3l or2023 Telarrgana and others questioned the above order dated 21 'O9 '2021 by Irling SLP (Civil) Diary No.2760 of 2022 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same was dismissed by order dated 0\'08'2022' It is further submitted that the purchasers from the Decree 4 - Holders in C.S.No.7 of 1958 under Final Decree M/s' Anish Constructions Company and My Palace Mr'rtually Aided Cooperative Society also preferred the Civil Appeal No'5784 of 2022 @ S'L'P'(Civil) No.7015 of 2022 before the Hon'ble supreme court against the order of this Court dated 2l.Og '2021 in I'A'No'S of 2O2O in Application No.837 of 2013 in C.S No'7 of 1958 and the same was allowed by orders dated 23.Oa.2022 by setting aside the orders of the High court d,ated 2l .O9.2021 . Thereafter, purchasers from the Decree Hoiders in C.S.No.Toflg58underFinalDecreeM/s.Anish.Constructions Company and My Palace Mutually Aided Co-operative Housing Society submitted an Application dated O5'O9 '2022 before the Second Respondent-District Collector with a request for de-notihcation of the land admeasuring Acs'92'56 cents out of Acs'274'33 cents' situated in Survey No.57 of Shamsiguda village from the Prohibited Properties and also for making necessary corrections in Revenue Records' Thereafter, the respondent authorities considered the claim of the M/s Anish Constructions Company and My Palace Mutuailv Aided Co-operative Housing Society for land admeasuring Acs'92'56 cents out of Acs.274.33 cents, situated in Sy'No'57 of Shamshiguda village by recording their names in the Dharani and the respondent No'6' 5 riAC,J&NVSK,J !,I.P No.19033 oi2023 Tahsildar, pernitted for execution of documents i.e. Deveiopment Agreement r;unr GpA bearing Document No.2/2023. 5. Thereaftrrr., the respondent No.2, District Colle ctor, under Endorsement c ated O 1.O3.2023 by considering the extenl of Ac.92.33 cents of M/s ArLish Constructions Company and My paleLce Mutually Aided co-opera tive Housing sociery recorded t heir names in Dharani and permitted f or execution ol registration and recorded th e remaining extent of Ac.1811 1 I guntas out of total extent of Ac.274.31; in Dharani in the name of (]overnment. It is contended that such proceedings are contrary to lav, and violation of Hon,ble Supreme Court repeated orders dated Ol 08.2022 and 23.Og.2022.

6. Further, ,he petitioner submitted an applicar-ion dated 21.06.2023 belore the respondent No.2, District corlector, for implementrn g the orders of the Hon,ble Supreme Court dated O1.O8.2O22 i;-r Sr.L.p. (Civil) Diary No.276O of 2022 and order datecl 23.08.2022 in Cir.it Appeal No.5784 of 2022 @ S.L.p.(Civil) No.7Ot5 of 2022 forthwith iu-rd to set aside the Gazettee Notification under File No 'tr's /47 3r /.2o 1 r)/ Baranagar/ Hydernagar dared 26.9 2013 by deleting the land to an extent of Ac.274.33 guntas in Surve.y No.57 of Shamshiguda village, Kukatpally Mandal, Medchar Markajgiri District from the List of prohibited properties Thereafter, the respondent No.2, District Co.lector, has not considered the application dated 21.06.2023, quest;oning the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition \ a i i 6 w.P. No.19033 0r2023 7 . The main grievance of the petitioner is that though the petitioner made an application daled 21.06.2023 to the respondent No.2, District Collector, seeking for deletion of subject property from the prohibited list by setting aside the Gazette Notification under File No.ES/4731l2Ol3lBalanagar/Hydernagar, dated 26.09'2013, no action has been taken thereon It is to be noted that the subject property of this writ petition is B. to an extent of Acs.274.33 guntas in Survey No.57 of Shamshiguda village, Kukatpally Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District, which was one of the scheduled lands in C.S. No.7 of 1958 i e' to Item No'252 in the Schedqle A' appended to the preliminary decree dated

06.04.1959. g. At this juncture, it is significant to note that the Division Bench ofthisCourtvideorderdated0g.0l.2025closedtheC.S.No.Tofl95B wherein at para No'36 observed as under: '36. On a perusal of the paragraph a(g) of the preliminary decree dated 06'O4 1959' it is evident that the defendalt Nos.2 to 22 wete entrtled to the properLies mentioned at item Nos.230 to 254 of Schedule A' alnexed to the preliminary decree, in case the same are restored or released in favour of Asmal Jahi Paigah' In tlle instant case, admittedly, there is no material to indicate that the properties mentioned at serial No.230 to 254 of Schedule A'to the preliminary decree have been restored or released in favour of Asmal Jahi Paigah. It is pertinent to note that as per para 4(g) of the preliminary ,1" 7 I]AC, - 5. NVSK, J rL P No ]0013 ot2023 decre: dated 06.O4.1959, the Commissioners- cum-.leceivers have the power to sell the property b1 rrir'' of public auction and exercise aJl powers necessary for effecting the division of the sale bctrveen the defendants No.2 to 12 and 14 to 22. Accordingly, each son would get 2/33 ald each daug[Ller would get 1/33 in the properties of Schec u1e 'A' except items 230 to 254 of the ScheclLle and items of properties allotted to the plzuntilf. The defendart Nos.2 to 22 will get their share namely, each son getting 2/35 and each daughter getting 1/35 from the arrears of income futurc income, compensalion or commutalion or sale prrceeds of the items 23O to 254 of Schedule A' detailed under the head of ,,Makthas,, in case of thc: szune are restored or released in favour of Paigah Asmar-r Jahi."

10. In the case on hand, it is to be noted that the subject_ property under this wrlt Inrtition is in respect of Sy.No.57 of Sha.rrshiguda village of Schedu r:-A of the suit in c.S. No.7 of 195g. Thr: Division Bench of this cor-ut vide order dated 09.01.2025 had crosecr the c.S. No.7 of 1958 rvhe rein at para No.40 it was observed that .,4s such, the submissions rr, ode on behatf of the objectors are unsustaittable and_ in that uieut of the matter, it can safely be conclud_ed. that no land.s are auailable for partiti<>n in item Nos.23O to 254 of Schedule ,A, antached. to the preliminary dec.ree. In the absence of preliminary d_ecre(,_ for item Nos.23O to 254 in Schedule ,A', no ftnal decree could haue been passed_. Tterefore, rq<:r1b filed earlier are uithout proper ueiJication, are ftctitious and the serLe are treated. os nullitg and. are herebg re-iected..,, j 8 H,IIC,J&NVS(J w.P. No.19033 or 2023 1 1. Since the C.S. No.7 of 1958 was ciosed with specif,rc observation that no lands are availAble for partition in Schedule-A and the subject land is in Sy.No.57 of Shamshiguda village.of Schedule A' of the suit, as such no further adjudication is required in this writ petition. That apart, the petitioner did not reveal that she belongs to which branch of the parties or legal heir in the C.S. No.7 of 1958.

12. At this juncture , it is not out of place to observe that as far as the averrnent made by the petitioner that the respondent authorities considered the claim of the M/s Anish Constructions Company and My Palace Muturally Aided Co-operative Housing Society for land admeasuring Acs.92.56 cents out of Acs.274.33 cents, situated in Sy.No.57 of Shamshiguda village and recorded their names in the Dharani and the respondent No.6, Tahsildar, permitted for execution of documents i.e. Development Agreement curn GPA bearing Document No.2l2O23 is concerned, it is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confer any title on the subject property and this order would not have any bearing on all those matters where title/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either in revision/ appeais for adjudication and in any other case this order also would not preclude the parties in asserting their rights before the competent Court of law. 9 riAc,.r & NvsK, J Ji P No 19033 oI2023

13. It is also to be noted that this Court has not exF,ressecl any opinion on the title or otherwise of the subject property. However, it is left open lcr the parties to pursue their remedies rLs available under law.

74. Accordingh,, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs As a set1,1gl, miscellaneous applications, if an-, pending, shall stand close :r1 //TRUE COPY// u -'D/'K'AMMAJI REGISTRAR ON OFFICER The Principal S)ecretary, Revenue Dep^artment' Secretariat Buirdings' The iili" i,i iSti^irana, Hvderabad- 500 063-' rhe District coIIector, rntegiSft di't"tti"icjri"" Complex' Anthaipally' Medchal --- rlr$i,'*,[t#ffrs,ffifiq.;[l#ri.fl,"ry-:m;:=.,,,., Pin Code . 500 094. iirli""i'"tiio*' iJratpattv Mandal, Kukatp-ailv' Hvderabad - 500 072' g*i ggi: ,t.zi#iismla#"is3:?l?JH3rn "",n ror the state or i"tingrnr, at HYderabad[OUTI Two CD CoPies (+ To, 1 2 3

4. 5.

6. 7. 8. L TJ LS I l i I HIGH COURT DATED:21 10312025 l ( ORDER WP.No.19033 of 2023 1i, J i4 ,.'.\ ( o 11 APn 2025 t D€sPATf,, u .b ) DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITH UT COSTS il- 26 3 z5 o t \