Smt. Shaik Begum Jan 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 of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and. ...RESPONDENTS a) To call for thc. records in Proceedings dated 06-06-2025 in File No.G/430/2025 passed by the Respondent No.3 and other connected record s. b) To declare and quash the Proceedings dated 06-06-202i in File No.G/430/2025 passed by the F.espondent No.3 as illegal and unconstitutic nal anrJ contrary to the provisions of latar. c) To Declare the Grft Deed dated 16-12-2016, (Doc. No.7:280/2016) executed by the Petitioner in favour of the Respondent No.6 and 7 as nu and r,,oid, obtained by fraud and misrepresentation and liable to be cancelled urrder S,:ction 23 of the Maintenance anC Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Ac .2007. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Sectron 151 CPC praying that in the t rcumstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the petition, the High Court rrray be pleased to direct the Respondenl 4 lo 7 not to dtsposes the Petitioner frorn the property bearing No.3-3-5'1/2, Bcdrai Bazar, Suryapet Town and [V]anrlal, Drstrict Suryapet, Telangana or to create third party rights, otherwise I shall suffer he.:vy. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. WASIM AHMED KHAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Smt. MANIDEEPTKA AGP FOR WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 7: -- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.22874 of2025 ORAL ORDER: Heard learnecl counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Manideepika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare 2'Petitionerismotherofrespon<lentNo.4.Respotrdent No.5 is the wife of respondent No'4' Respondent Nos'6 and 7 are children of respondent Nos'4 and 5' Petitioner has executed registered gift settlement deed bearing Document No.7280 of 20 16, dated 16'12'2016 in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7 with regard to House bearing No'3-3-51/2' admeasuring 320 square yards' situated at Bodrai Bazar' Suryapet Mandal and District' Thereafter' respondent Nos'4 and 5 did not take care of her welfare and they failed to maintain the petitioner. Therefore, she has filed an application befbre respondent No.3 seeking canoellation of the said registered gift settlernent deed' 1\ I I I i l 2

3. Vide order dated 06.06.2025, respondent No.3 disposed of the said application directing respondent No.4 and daughters of the petitioner to pay monthly nraintenancc of Rs.8,000/- to the petitioner. Thus, respondent No.3 failed to consider the relief sought by her to cancel the ;aid registered gift settlement deed. Aggrieved by the sairl ordor dated

06.06.2025 of respondent No.3, petitioner lilcd the presenf wrrt petlllon

4. The irnpugned order is in tents of the Act. 2007 lt is an appealable order. She has to preler an appezrl in terms of Section 16(1) of the Act,2007 belore the Appellate Authority

5. Th,:re is no dispute rvith regard to tlie legi: lposition that under the following three exceptional circumstarLces though an alternati','e remedy IS available, the writ petition IS maintainable. The said three circurnstances are a:; follows:- I A breach of fundamental rights;

11. l1l. A violation of the principles of natural justice; An excess of jurisdiction; or a challenge to the vlres ofthe statute or dclegated legis ation. .i , 3

6. The said principie was also laid down by the three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Asst. Commissioner of State Tax v Commercial Steel Limitedr and also Whirlpool Corporation v Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai2. Whereas, the present case, is not falling in any of the afbresaid three categories. Therefore, the petitioner herein cannot contend that though there is an altelnative and efficacious remedy, the present writ petition is maintainable. There are several factual aspects which this Couft cannot consider in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia. 7 ) Therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable

7. In the light of the same, notice to respondent Nos.4 to 7 is dispensed with. This Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to pret'er an appeal challenging the impugned proceedings dated 06.06.2025 passed by respondent No.3, in terms of Section 16(1) of the Act, 2007 before Appellate Authority. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to take all l Manu/SCiOS01/2021 2lroosy s scc 4 the grounds and contentions, which she has raised in the present Writ Petition, before the Appellate AutLrority, and it is for the Appellate Authority to considel the sarn::. On filing of such appeal, Appellate Authority shall dispose of the same in accordance with law. Misccllaneous applications, if any pendi rrg, shall stand closed. l'here sha[[ be no order as to costs. SD/- A M LLIKARJUNA RAO NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To, \ 1 The Prinr;ipal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secr&ariat, Hyderabad 2 The District Collector, Suryapet District at Suryapet. The Chairman-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Const tuted under the l\,4aintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizerns Acl. 2OO7 , Suryapet IVunicipality, Suryapet District, Telangana. 4 ( One CC 1o SRl. WASIIV AHMED KHAN Advocate [OI]UC] Two CCs to GP FOR WOIVEN AND CHTLD WELFARE, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] o KKS Two CD Copies 9 t -:==:\ ., tr.;.i' E SEP./025 o,\\ /.,'\,.... .,.] :--.=-:..;:-7 HIGH COURT DATED:0410812025 .1 ,,1 \ ti5 1 \. ",\i. + \ ORDER WP.No.22874 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

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 certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and. ...RESPONDENTS a) To call for thc. records in Proceedings dated 06-06-2025 in File No.G/430/2025 passed by the Respondent No.3 and other connected record s. b) To declare and quash the Proceedings dated 06-06-202i in File No.G/430/2025 passed by the F.espondent No.3 as illegal and unconstitutic nal anrJ contrary to the provisions of latar. c) To Declare the Grft Deed dated 16-12-2016, (Doc. No.7:280/2016) executed by the Petitioner in favour of the Respondent No.6 and 7 as nu and r,,oid, obtained by fraud and misrepresentation and liable to be cancelled urrder S,:ction 23 of the Maintenance anC Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Ac .2007. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Sectron 151 CPC praying that in the t rcumstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the petition, the High Court rrray be pleased to direct the Respondenl 4 lo 7 not to dtsposes the Petitioner frorn the property bearing No.3-3-5'1/2, Bcdrai Bazar, Suryapet Town and [V]anrlal, Drstrict Suryapet, Telangana or to create third party rights, otherwise I shall suffer he.:vy. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. WASIM AHMED KHAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Smt. MANIDEEPTKA AGP FOR WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 7: -- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.22874 of2025 ORAL ORDER: Heard learnecl counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Manideepika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare 2'Petitionerismotherofrespon<lentNo.4.Respotrdent No.5 is the wife of respondent No'4' Respondent Nos'6 and 7 are children of respondent Nos'4 and 5' Petitioner has executed registered gift settlement deed bearing Document No.7280 of 20 16, dated 16'12'2016 in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7 with regard to House bearing No'3-3-51/2' admeasuring 320 square yards' situated at Bodrai Bazar' Suryapet Mandal and District' Thereafter' respondent Nos'4 and 5 did not take care of her welfare and they failed to maintain the petitioner. Therefore, she has filed an application befbre respondent No.3 seeking canoellation of the said registered gift settlernent deed' 1\ I I I i l 2

3. Vide order dated 06.06.2025, respondent No.3 disposed of the said application directing respondent No.4 and daughters of the petitioner to pay monthly nraintenancc of Rs.8,000/- to the petitioner. Thus, respondent No.3 failed to consider the relief sought by her to cancel the ;aid registered gift settlement deed. Aggrieved by the sairl ordor dated

06.06.2025 of respondent No.3, petitioner lilcd the presenf wrrt petlllon

4. The irnpugned order is in tents of the Act. 2007 lt is an appealable order. She has to preler an appezrl in terms of Section 16(1) of the Act,2007 belore the Appellate Authority

5. Th,:re is no dispute rvith regard to tlie legi: lposition that under the following three exceptional circumstarLces though an alternati','e remedy IS available, the writ petition IS maintainable. The said three circurnstances are a:; follows:- I A breach of fundamental rights;

11. l1l. A violation of the principles of natural justice; An excess of jurisdiction; or a challenge to the vlres ofthe statute or dclegated legis ation. .i , 3

6. The said principie was also laid down by the three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Asst. Commissioner of State Tax v Commercial Steel Limitedr and also Whirlpool Corporation v Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai2. Whereas, the present case, is not falling in any of the afbresaid three categories. Therefore, the petitioner herein cannot contend that though there is an altelnative and efficacious remedy, the present writ petition is maintainable. There are several factual aspects which this Couft cannot consider in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia. 7 ) Therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable

7. In the light of the same, notice to respondent Nos.4 to 7 is dispensed with. This Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to pret'er an appeal challenging the impugned proceedings dated 06.06.2025 passed by respondent No.3, in terms of Section 16(1) of the Act, 2007 before Appellate Authority. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to take all l Manu/SCiOS01/2021 2lroosy s scc 4 the grounds and contentions, which she has raised in the present Writ Petition, before the Appellate AutLrority, and it is for the Appellate Authority to considel the sarn::. On filing of such appeal, Appellate Authority shall dispose of the same in accordance with law. Misccllaneous applications, if any pendi rrg, shall stand closed. l'here sha[[ be no order as to costs. SD/- A M LLIKARJUNA RAO NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To, \ 1 The Prinr;ipal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secr&ariat, Hyderabad 2 The District Collector, Suryapet District at Suryapet. The Chairman-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Const tuted under the l\,4aintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizerns Acl. 2OO7 , Suryapet IVunicipality, Suryapet District, Telangana. 4 ( One CC 1o SRl. WASIIV AHMED KHAN Advocate [OI]UC] Two CCs to GP FOR WOIVEN AND CHTLD WELFARE, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] o KKS Two CD Copies 9 t -:==:\ ., tr.;.i' E SEP./025 o,\\ /.,'\,.... .,.] :--.=-:..;:-7 HIGH COURT DATED:0410812025 .1 ,,1 \ ti5 1 \. ",\i. + \ ORDER WP.No.22874 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS