The High Court · 2025

the same and rie,r lar action of the resF Regurarizatio, .r,,,,."^.1n" of,the petition",. .,,,;::::.rvo-:ooooszg-e;;l'"Ji::::j: ;:1,:"J3r:i;jil; c.o nse q u e n, y l' l,l"'llJ ;^.TI :iT l,l :lr"l o,n n1, n o No'35,an extent ,rf r0o squarJva;":::^ti: subject propertr prot Bearins yards of site equal to 250.8r) sqrrare meters in sy.No 60 of Gutliata ol:""" village , serlingi District as rttega,r , .ro]nu""t Mandar' Ransa Reddv to raw and arr:;o vioration.rr G0 Ms.No.733 o, ur, of'T'r, Article t4'2, & 300-4 of constitution of rnct a dated 18- 1z-201str,,,, lno orthepetition",,".r.n';j,1;:*l;':#,:";T"j::H"::1"J p.roperty plot trss.,ing No.3s to an extent of 300 srruare varrls :;-:"-"t ;*:x::::;:,ii,r,l;;::':""""fl1"*ll';','j,1ru*; e the sign board from the subject protr)erty, in the interest of Justice, "", ,,.inl "";;:" ";;;:","t'"" t 31.10..t998 consequenttv unlustlna t Main prayer is amenotr,tl as per C.O. dt. 2l.06.2[23in l.A.No.1 ot i):023 IANo:1OF 2021 Petition undr-,r S:otion i51 CpC praying that in the circunistances stated in the affidavit filed ir. 5;rlpporf of the petition, the High Court ma,z be pleased to direct the respondent:; ,,,3t to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property plot bearing No.35, an o (rent of 300 square yards. of site equar to 250.g0 square meters in Sy.No.60 0r' c) rttarabegumpeta Virage, seriringampari lr4anrlar, Ranga Reddy District. lA NO: 2 oF 2021 Between: Pakalapati Anuradl ar. Wo Siva Rama Raju, Aged about 2.9 y,:>ars, Occ. Housewife, Residin 1 at 15315 eiiuiciif; rvr#li virY""v]errtonsv lre, r'/rD 2oa66, USA. RepfeSentec ly her GPA Holder Vegesn-a Murthv Raiu' 'j/o :subbaraiu ffil'45*Ht,":ji, eu.in"ii, nvdlFni tl;r81' sitafuram Coronv' Poranki' Kiishna Distri'r ...p!::rtrtoNER AND 'I:?":1,1",$,HIXX?333;,53P.':J.',1".8'i:?'5i:'?'?T:"3y"oGovernment' 2. The District Collector' Ranga Reddy' 3. The Joint Collector' Urban Land Ceiling' Ranga Reddy' 4. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation' Rep' by its Commissioner' 5. The District Registrar' Ranga Reddy' 6. The Assistant Cof f""to'' U'"Oan Land Ceiling Department' Ranga Reddy' HYderabad' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Section I 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit tr"a in supJort.ott" p"tition, the High court may be pleased to as respondent No G in 16" 356vs Writ implead the proposed Otli Petition '"tponatnt IANO:2 oF2o22 that in the circumstances stated e High Court maY be Pleased to petition' Petition under Section 151 CPC praylng in the affidavit filed in support of the petition ' th permit to file documents as per index in this writ Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI NARESH REDDY CHINNOLLA counser for the Respondent No'1 to 3 & 5: t"T F5AtatttJ[iffi,? counsel for the Respondent No'4: 33'3Ht',ilr'iuDHAN REDDY' The Court made the following: ORDER ? L 0 THE HCN'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY P ORDER 3 5 4o 2 2 This w.it )etition is fired seeking a direction f-om this court to declare the ,.r,on of the respondents in rejecting the Land Regularizatrorr r\ ))lication No.3000052966 vide proceediigs dated t8.72.20L9 clair.r i1g that the said land falls under ULC prccee,dings and conseque.ttl) erecting the sign boards on the subject prooerty plot bearing N,r : 5, an extent of 300 square yards of site eqLral to 250.80 squere, rr €rters in Sy.No.60 of Guttalabeg um pet.r Village, Serilingampalli lvt;rndal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal, irrbit..ary, unjust and conr.ra 1/ to raw and arso vioration G.o.Ms.r\ro.7l3 d,lted 31.10.1988 anci ,ril ative of Articles 14, 2t and 3004 of CorstitLtion of India.

2. purchas.ed 1:lot It is the cll m of the petitioner that she bearing No.35 a lneasuring 300 sq. yards in Gutta la begum perta r/illage, Serlingampally Mandal, District (schedtrle property) under registered sale deeo da:ed 16.07.1990 frcn.t tr_" previous owner, Indukuri Suryakantlamrra. Later, the petitior er alienated the under registered sal,: dr,:ed Sy. No.60 of Ranga Re Jdy beafing dOCuntert '1c.2140 of 2016 dated 19.02.2016 in ravour or one B. Krishnavelr. The sale deed dated 19.02.2016 cortaini; a recital that th3 '/er clor applied for LRS permission vide Applical ion 2 No.3000052966 dated 31'01'2016 and received acknowledgment from GHMC. It is submrtted that the ULC Department erected board on the compound wa* of the schedure property stating that the rand belongs to ULC department' on enquiry' the petitioner came to know that her LRS apprication was rejected through online proceedings dated 18'12'2019 stating that the site falls under ULC surplus land as per the list of ULC surplus land under Section 10(6) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act' 1976 (for short'the Act') furnished by the Special Officer and Competent Authority'.

3.ItiSSubm|ttedthattheschedulepropertyisincludedinthe peripheral area of Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration and exempted under ULC the Act in terms of G'O'Ms'No'733 dated 31'10'1988' The layout of the petitioner was approved the authorities after G.O.Ms.No.733 dated 31'10'1988 came into force' There are several plots in Guttalabeg u mpet' which have been regularized and plots is shown as ULC surplus land' After lapse of 30 none of the respondent authorities are now claiming that the years, the property is covered by ULC proceedings without any manner of right. The petitioner is in possession of the schedule proPerty' As sign -board is erected by the respondent authorlties' the petitioner is constrained to file this writ petition' J n

4. Jhr, ,:; se of the respondent No.2, as per tl're counte affidavit, is that one l;ri Earani Ramaiah, was pattadar of lanr l bearing Sy.No.6l tcrleasuring Ac.72.2g guntas, Guttalabegumpe t Village, Serilingam:;rl ), Mandal, Rangareddy District. rhe sairJ Earani Ramaiah ciel rep;urun,ed by his legal heir, E. Nager;h, r,vho filed declaration urder Section 6(1) of the Act, declaring ^e Ia,rds held by his f;rftrsr in C.C.No.F1l 4277/6(t)/20O3. Acccrdingty, enquiry was cond|Jcfe,l and provisional order was passed under ;ection g(1) and notice unrj:, sections g(3) of the Act was issue(i on 29.07.2004 determinirrg th,r land owner as excess land holder to an e> tent of 51,395.12 sc. r )i-.ters in Sy.No.60 of Guttalabegumpet V ilagr,r, after allowing retaint t,le extent of 1,000.00 sq. meters to him under Section 4( L),.b| of the Act. Objections were not riled with n the stipulated per.ic,(r and final orders under Section B(4) of tl,e Act were issued o ) 07.O3.2004 confirming Section B( t) ,.)rder. Thereafter, notir.i :,ltion under Section 10(1) of the Act lras ir,;sued and pubtishe(t i1 A.p. Gazette No.165 dated 2g 07.:t.OO4. The notificai:io r t,rder Section 10(3) of fhe Act was isr;ued and published in A.p Gazette No.175 dated 12.08.2004. Notice r_nder Section 10(li) !v r s issued on 07 .01.2006 and served on the declarant on 1,ii.0 t,2006. Thereafter, order under Secr:ion 1O((;) of the Act was isr;ue d on 17.O3.20O7 and possession of the surplus land to an ,rxl.eT: of 50,395.12 sq. meters was taken ovei on ! .dP 4

08.02.2008 and handed SerilingamPallY Mandal' over to Mandal Revenue InsPector' The surPlus land vested with the GovernmentandthesameisinthepossessionofGovernmentSince

08.02.2008. It is submitted that the sale deed of the petitioner dated 5. 16.07.1990 and subsequent sale made by the petitioner under sale deed dated 19.02'016 are void under Sections 5(3) and 10(a) of the Act, as permission was not obtained under Section 26 of the Act. The Government issued various G'Os i'e' Revenue (UC-I) Department dated 29 'O7 '2OO2; G.O.Ms.No.455. G.O. Ms. No.747 Revenue (UC-1) DePartment Revenue (ULC) DePartment d dated 18.06.2008 and G'o'Ms'No'92 ated 26.05.2016 for regularisation of ULCsurpluslandspurchasedbythethirdpartyoccupants.Several persons have applied for regularization of their lands and most of the lands have been regularized in terms of the above G'Os' Despite giving ample opportunities' the petitioner failed to file any regularization application and she is not entitled for regularization at this juncture. 6 ItisfurthersubmittedthatthesubjectlandfallsinUrban Agglomeration and not exempted under G'O'Ms'No'73 dated 3l.l0.lgssasGuttalabegumpetiSnotwithintheperipheralarea. -) .l cc,ntending

7. The rr: ;;>ondent No.4 also filed counter affidavit that the LFls i pplication submitted by the petitioner was re ected as clearancr: ,rcr1 ULC Department was not obtaineC. The r:learance from the .,1.: Department is pre_requisite for p.ocessin(:l of the applicaticn!; f I - regularization of the plot under t-RS as per guideline:; r;sr- ed by the Government from time to tirne a)nd also Rule 6 (<i) o. ":he LRS Scheme under G.O.Ms.No.15. f,Li dated 02.11.2015 Tr'e petitioner faired to produce the crearance from the ULC Depaftnter t and thus, the LRS application was site of th€, "e;er:ted. As the t:e1.i :ioner was covered by ULC surplus lanc, short fall letter dated Ltt 1).)619 was issued by rejecting thr: apotication of the petitiorre .

8. In tl-e re,lrly amdavit that Guttal3b3!lr npet falls under G.O. Mr;.ll ) 733 dated affidavit, thr-. petitioner filed by the petitioner, in the peripheral area it is cont ended ilnd exe.npted

31.10.1988. In the additional reply submitted Madhalrur and Guttalabegum:)et /illages are under peripheral area f rom the year CL/3102/78 dated 1978 by virtu€ of notification 16.10.19i,8 arrd by the date of i:;sLance of G.O.Ms.No.733 dated 31. 10.1988, the properties in N4a(lltapur and Guttalabegumpet are in p€,ripheral area and under tlre sa o G.O., an extent of Ac.5.00 guntas; of land has been exempte J -t-here is another Circular Memo No UC.11(2)/88-4 datr:d 1g.04.1989 wherein it is ctarified 139')40/ that the a 6 Subsequently, villages of Madhapur and Guttalabegumpet are in peripheral area' Memo No'139 27 ttlc'll(2)tg8-9 dated 20']-1-'t997 was issued withdrawing the earlier Memo No' 139040/UC' 11(2)/88- 4 dated 18'04'1989 wherein Madhapur and Guttalabegumpet were withdrawn from peripheral area and they weie brought into the urban land agglomeration area Till such time' the properties of Madhapur and Guttalabegumpet are under the peripheral area' 9. Mr. C' Naresh Reddy' learned counsel for the petitioner' submitted that the petitioner purchased the schedule property in the year 1990 under registered sale deed dated 16'07'1990' The sale deed was registered as the land was in peripheral area and covered by G'O'Ms'No'733 dated 31'10'1988' The petitioner obtained information of the Memo No' 139040/UC' 11(2)/88-4 dated 18.04.1989 under the Right to Information Act' 2005' wherein it was crarified that Guttalabegumpet has been changed from the core are to peripheral are with effect from 16'10'1988' Subsequent Memo No.139 27lUC'tL(2)lg8-9 dated 20'll'lgg7 issued by the GovernmentwithdrawingMemoNo.l3go4ot}c.tl(2)t88-4dated lS.04.lgSgwillnothaveanybearingonthetitleofthepetitioner, as the sale deed was executed in the year 1990 and withdrawal of Memo No.1390 4OIUC't1(2)t88-4 dated 18'04'1989 was in the year No.13927lUC.11(2)/98-9 dated 1997. Thus, bY the time Memo was not ln Possession of the z}.ll.tgg7 was issued, the land I l original ow roi , Earani Ramaiah of E. Naqe:;h j/o. Iate E. Rama is stated t :, F a ve been filed in year 2001. or his legal heir and the iah, under Section 6(1) C.C.No.F t/ 427 7 / 6 ( 1 ) / 2oo r de,cla ration of the Act, in the

10. Mr. ill-; lapathi Rao, learned Government f,leacter for Assignment, sr t)mitted that the petitioner does not havt,t locus standi to inslitr:rl this writ petition. The sale deed oF thc pei.,tioner dated 16.07. 19{ 0 is hit by Section 5(3) read with Sectic n 1(r(4) of the Act, as e;<errotion under Section 26 of the Act was not l.aken. was in core area and the sale deed i; nutl and rroceedings in CC.No.F1l4227/6(1)/2r_tOS and the declarant or his legal heir hal: not {_rl .(l proceedings. The petitioner is a third lart\,,and void. The U t.(. attained fir a lit! Guttalabegunrpr_. challenged th€, not entitled to Fil: t:his writ petition.

11. Two issLe: arise for consideration in this writ petitior,:

1. Whether the schedule property is covered by G. C). tvrs Ilrr.733 dated 31.10.19g8.

2. Whr:trer the ULC proceedings in CC.No.F1i422l / 6(1)/.;t0t S declaring E. Nagesh as surplus holder is binciirrg r n the petitioner in respect of the schedt_ le prope rty 8 I u No 1 when G.O.Ms.No.733 |2.ThepetitionerpurchasedtheschedulepropeftyUnder registered sale deed dated 16'07'1990' It is clarified in the Memo No.139040/UC.lt(2)/88-4 dated 18'04'1989 that the land in Guttalabegumpet is covered by G'O'Ms'No'733 dated 31'10'1988' subsequently. Memo No.139O4}tuc'tt(2)188-4 dated 18'04'1989 was withdrawn by Memo No' 13927lUC' 1 l(2)198-9 dated 20.tt.t9g7. During thls intervening period' the petitioner purchased the schedule property in the year 1990' Thus' in the opinion of this Court. the property purchased by the petitioner was dated 31.10'1988 was applicable to Moreover, the registering authority has GuttalabegumPet village' registered sale deed of the schedule property dated 16'07 1990 on the declaration given by the petitioner that the land ls covered under G.O.Ms.No.33 dated 31'10'1988' Thus' even before the land' which was earlier included under G'O'Ms'No'733 dated 31'10'1988 cametobeexcludedfromthepurviewofthesaidG'O'' the petitioner became the owner of the schedule property' It is not known how the declarant, E. Nagesh, S/o' Late E' Ramaiah' land, which purportedly includes the schedule declared the property. Even if the schedule property is included in the declaration. the same will not, affect the rights of the petitioner & i 9 inasmuch :s :,re Iand was not in possession of the declar,,rnt in the year 2003 \^,t-en Section 6(1) declaration was filed I i l I ) Issu€ No.. is answered accordingly. ISSUE No ,2:

13. The de< l;tration is stated to have been filed in the y{,)ar 2003 in proceecrinc s in CC.No.F t/4277 /6(l)/2003. Thouqh t he ULC proceeding:; ir '. not part of the court records, it is the ;:dmitted case of thr: espondents that Section g(1) order rvas passed, thereafter, :;€(tion g(4) order was passed on 01.03.2t)04, Section 10(3) notifir:atirr was issued and published on 12.08.2tr04; Section 10(5) notcr: iras issued on 07.01.2006; Section l0(6r or(:er was passed or lj tt.).ZOO7 and possession of the surplus lanci to an extent of I;0,_ 95.12 sq. meters in Sy.No.60, cutt,tlab(,)gumet village, was tal €,n on 08.02.2008. As stated above, fl-e sr:hedule property could rrot have been declared by E. Nagesil S/c. Iate E. Ramaial- irr C C. No. F/42 77 /6(l)/2003. Further, it was mandatory for the Sperc i:l )fficer and Competent Authority to ssur_. nol.ice to the petitiorrer-, rn possession of the pr,tperty, as on ^'ho was

07.01.2006 whe:rr Section 10(5) was notice was issued Issue Nc.2 s answered accordingly. \ 10 ' . 'to -and. Section Resulation) that though Land (ceilins (6; ;r;" ott'

14. Notice person in possession is mandatory as per the recent decision of the Supreme Court in A'P' ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT coRPoRATIoN v' TAHSILDAR1' wherein it was held as under: '28. A close reading of the above judgment more particularly tn" ala" f uia therein lays down section 1o(3) of tt; ";; Act, 1978 (Central OO'' *n'tn is pari-materia 11(3) of tn" tu'n''i" *'au uroan Land (ceiling and Regulation)na,rgzatceilingAct).Providesthatthevacant yet it does notmean that the land is deemed to o" "t*'*O' possession of tn" rana iu' been taken over" Thjs Court has categorically tt"t"o t*t ti" procedure contained under sub- mustte'scrupulouslv sections (5) '"d *t view that Section 10(5) of ' followed' rnis courl *"t "t the Act, 1976 *nitn |tla-' ateia to Section 11(5) of the Ceiling Act stiputates ttrat any vacant land even if vested in (3)' the competent authority the State 'not' "o-t"ttion has to by notice in writing order any person who may be in possession of it to surrender or deliver possession of the land to the Statf Gouernment within thirty days of the service of notice' If the landowner fails or refuses to do so' then the State Government has to follow the procedure under sub-section (6) of Section 10 or Section 11 as the case may be' and take forcible possession' 29 Thus' the dictum' as laid in Hari Ram (supra)' is that where the possession of the subject land has not been taken over by the State Government or by any person duly authorised by the State Government in this behalf or by the competent authority' the Proceedings under the Act would notsurviveandmerevestingofthevacantlandwiththe StateGovernmentbyoperationoflaw'withoutactual "'u ' zo25 SCC OnLine sc 447 I f I t II poss,:rs:; ln, is not sufficien m€ r€ p: l _3r possession ,or: , stet€ (:( \ernment unress a cosent r, dence that lan,, 1a; taken over by evict the lalc. the onus ,, on ,n,'nn physi(al )l)ssession or tne , over tri:fi).e the repeal. put it in other woris, t he not save the situation for ttre ".,rr, ,irtiliir:.::::,i: ;:::::,;: each and every perso,r Fro,n state to establish :hat actu:)l excess vacant land was takel

37. S.rb.,erction (5) oF Section 1O talks of ,,possession which sa,s; where any land is vested in the ;tat(, Govern nr: r. under subsr com F er _.n t,, uthority ."r,=:T:.,1:l,lt j.il,r,,".ll; ji, perscn, y/lr() may be in possession of it to surrender or transfur p,) ;5;s55ion to the S person, Jrr, authorized ,r;:"J':,::J::;:H;:: anv cther 38. I,' r;e acfo possession has already passed on to the State Gr:ve -rrment by the two deeming provisions ur,der sub-s€rctlon (3) to Section 10, there is no necessity of u:;ing the exp.e:;s i()n ,,where any Iand is vested.,, under sub_ section l5) lo Section 10. Surrendering or transter ot possession lrder sub_section (3) to Section 1O can be voluntary, sc .hat the person may get the compensation as provided urJlr Section 11 of the Act, tg76 early.. Once there is no ,/oluntary surrender or delivery of possessi,rn, necess;lr ly l-e State Government has to issue notice in writing u'rd3- subsection (5) to Section 10 to surrender or deliver poss(ssion. Sub-section (5) of Section 10 visualires a situati.F of surrendering and delivering possessi(,n, peacefL Il\, !/lrile sub-section (6) of Secuon 1O contemplates a situatio- cl forceful dispossession.

39. Sectio r fh,l -r €rre vesting of the land under subsection (3) of confer any right on the State 0 rvou ld & \ 12 Governmenttohavedefactopossessionofthevacantland unless there has been a voluntary surrender of vacant land before 18.03.1999' State has to establish that there has been a voluntary surrender of vacant land or surrender and delivery of peaceful possession under subsection (5) of Section 10 or forceful dispossession under sub-section (6) of Section 10. On failure to establish any of those situations' the landowner or holder can claim the benefit of Section 3 of the Repeal Act, 1999' ln the case on hand' the State Government has in our considered view not been able to establish any of those situations and hence the learned Single Judge was right in holding that the appellant herein is entitled to get the benefit of Section 3 of the Repeal Act'

1999.'

15. In view of the aforesaid reasons' the writ petition is allbwed holding the schedule property (plot) of petitioner is not surplus land Hence' the impugned in proceedings CC.No.Ft/427716(l)t2OO3' proceedings dated 18'12'2019 are set aside and the respondent No.4 is directed to consider the LRS application of the petitioner bearing No.3000052966 without insisting for clearance from the ULC dePartment' closed. The miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall stand There shall be no order as to costs' ,gtrhlltf Fj,x,q"tffi ursdav' the --- -"L I ,/ The Hon'ble SD/. A. SRINIVASA RE AS ISTANT REGIST DDY RAR To, F /ffRUE COPY'/ 1 The Principal Secretary ' BRKR Bhavan, HYderabad, State of Telangana to Government, Reve n * SECTION OFFICER Department, Secretariat' 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy' The Joint Collector, Urban Land Ceiling' Ranga Reddy' J Municipal corpo'atior, Hvderabad.

4. The Cornrrisl ir;ner, Gn 5. rhe Distric:r rr:ristrar, ;:H:;ffad : J::::: rli*1,.1; 8. one cc ro rjr? a ,or,n ' ilh%P"?:i'i s l l io * Urban Land ceirins Department, Ranla Reddv REDDY CHINNoLLA' Ad ^J:,:'-'ffi m #l':: ;J'::1"' rrsr I t'oun ror the state 'lf relangana at

10. Two cD c;or.rie,. 5[P 4- & HIGH COUFIT DATED: 1iUA6t2O2S CC TODAY \::.. :.\ , ,-\\ :,l ,: ,l ..tii/ '_1J , I \, ORDER 1HE Slqt ( o (_) 2 6 Jut{ ?0?l WP.No.3056;4 of 2021 i r: a. -'.+.i..,-_--! ALLOWING ]'HE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT GO.STS il'x ?b b