Arshad Ahmed v. The State of Telangana

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, order or direction more one in the nature of wRlr oF lvANDAlvus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in entertaining to register the agriculture land admeasuring Ac. 0-26 guntas in sy.No.509/4 situated at Sathapur village, Peddakothapalli Mandal, Nagarkurnool District (Earlier Mahabubnagar District) in favour of the petitioner younger brother lvuneer Ahmed is illegal, arbitrary. contrary constitution of lndia. to law and violation of Articles, 3004 of ;{ile lA NO: 'l OF 2021 ) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying thbt in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 not to entertain any registration in respect of the agriculture land admeasuring Ac. 0-26 guntas in Sy.No.509/4 situated at Sathapur village, Peddakothapalli Mandal, Nagarkurnool District (Earlier lvlahabubnagar District) in favour of the petitioner younger brother Muneer Ahmed Pending disposal of the Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : MS.G.PADMA, rep., SRI MOHD GULAM RASOOL Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : MS.O.HARITHA KIRAN, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.3tos : -- The Court made the following: ORDER I THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION i[o.26 of 2O2l ORDER: This Writ })ctition is filed seeking the folloq,ing rehef: "... to rssue to issue a WiL order or direction more one in the noture of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaing the action of the 2nd respondent in entertaining to register the agicitltu re land admeasuring Ac. 0-26 guntas in Sy.Ilo.509/A situated at Sathapur uillage, Peddakothapalli Manda| Nagarlomool Distict (Earlier Mahabubnagar Distnct) in fauour of the petitioner Aounger brother Muneer Ahmed is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to laut and uiolation of Articles, 30OA of the con stitution of India and pass such other order or orders as tltis Hort'ble Court deems just and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2. Heard Ms. G. Padma, learned counsel representing Mr- Mohd. Ghulam Rasool, learned counsel for petitioner, and Ms. D.Haritha Kir:rn, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 ar-d 2.

3. Brief lacts Petitioner's lather was owner and possessor of tand admeasuring Ac.O.26 guntas in Survey No.509/A situated at Sathapur Village, Peddakothapalli Mandal, Nagarkurnool District. Father of petitioner died 22 years back (i.e., in ). JAX, J 1999) . After death of petitioner's father, the narne of petitioner's mother was m'utated in revenue rer:ords ulde ROR proceedings dated 23.O3.1996 by the Mandal Revenue Officer. It is the case of the petitioner that he iras to get equal share as that ol his younger brother, M ttneer Ahmed. Petitioner contends that his younger brother, colluding with his mother, IS trying to register the rvtrole property admeasuring Ac.O.26 guntas in his name. [t is submitted that the property is ancestral property and without the knowledge of the petitioner, his mother is intending to register the propert)' in the name of his younger brother. Hr:nce, this writ petition is filed to not to entertain any document for registration ln respect r-rf the subject propt:rt5z by the respondent No.2 i.e., Tahsildar, Peddakothapalli Mandal l,earned counsel for petitioner submitted that 4. land admeasuring Ac.O.26 gurltas in Survey No'509/A situated at Sathapur Village, Peddakothapalli Mandal, Nagarkurnocl District, is the ancestral property which was in the name of his father and subsequently mutated in the name of his mother uicle ROR proceedings dated 23'03'1996' 3 JL<. J w.P.No-26 of 2o2 t It is further submitted that the property being the ancestral property, petitioner is entitied for an equal share as that of his younger brothcr. His younger brother and his mother have colluded with each otl-rer and denying the share of petitioner.

5. It is submitted that petitioner made a representation dated O7. I l.2O2O belore respondent No.2 not to entertain any document for registration in respect of the subject property in lavour of his younger brother. If any such registration is entertained, petitioner would be deprived of his legitimate share in the property.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistalt Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that representation not to entertain any document for registration of property cannot be made solely on the assumption that propert-v would be transferred by his mother to his younger brother, who has colluded with his mother (claimed), that the relief being sought is premature and as such, representation cannot be entertained by the authorities and writ petition is not maintainable. .1 JAK, J \rt.P.No-26 of2O21 ".f

7. Heard learned counsels, perused thc record and considered the submissions. B. Father of petitioner was the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.O.26 guntas in Survey No.5O9/A situated at Sathapur Village, Peddakothapalli Mandal, Nagarkurnool District. Father of petrtioner died 22 years back. Name of petitioner's mother (respondent No.3) rvas recorded in revenue records uide ROR proceedings, dated

23.03.1996. An application dated 07.11.2O2O was presented before respondent No.2 not to entertain any clocument for registration in respect of the sutrject property in favour of his younger brother. It is observed from the averments in the affidavit filed in support of vrrit pctition that respondenl No.4 (brother of petitioner), allegedly colluded with his mother (respondent No.3) and his mother is intending to register the property in favour of his younger brcther. g. It is only on an assumption that, property is going to be registerecl in the name of respondent No'4 by respondent No.3, writ petition is filed seeking a direction that representation/ application dated 07. il.2O2O be considered. / --------' z J .IAK. J rY P N6 26 of 2O2 I I If representations of the nature, as made by the petitioner, are entertained by the office of Sub Registrar, any third party can file representation and request the office of Sub Registrar not to register any property. This Court cannot issue directions to receive the representation of petitioner and direct the office of Sub Registrar not to register the property. Be that as it may, petitioner has remedies available under law, if his legitimate share is denied in a manner unknown to law.

10. With the above observations, the writ petition IS disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand d i smissed. SD/.P.PONNA KRISHNA SI TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 .7 4 5 The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secretariat Buildings, State of Telangana, Hyderabad. 50O 022. The Tahsildar/Sub-Registrar, Dharani Peddakothapalli Mandal' Nagarkurnool District (Earlier Mahabubnagar District) One CC to SRI MOHD GULAIU RASOOL, Advocate. IOPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. louTI Two CD Copies. W BSK TKS ,'1 . 1,, r.: tr. 01I NT LI 2t6 -a:- HIGH COURT DATED:1 410812025 ORDER WP.No.26 of 2021 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS W fl 10 v I