High Court · 2025

petition un'e r ! ention.1,51 cpc praying that in the c rcurrst. nces stated rn the affidavit firec in 'r 'lrport of the petition, i;"'Fiffi cor.t mry ,(, p eased to pass an rnterim order r*,.,: n,ng the ,.".pono"nir'z,ii",.iJ tro, rhar,ginc the nature of the apptication *.,:tr, r_.ed land in i";;-s;;r;; No_"2s, ato,,t ,f tvard No.3z ot Ma',epa'y v,taq'' / ; traoar vanoat oeain'n'ni*"]ri, ., ,4. Sa,frrbi.d, Hvderabad (as per or, front ,;ar-ying on any constructions of ir-) r atLrre whatsoev".. or"ift,l ,i;1, - """''"""u' wvcr rne atoresaid ;rntl rletrding disposal of the subject Writ i ,r tr, l.A. NO: 50F20 t5]}ry.!l MP. NO: 3't300 0F2015 .the Ct,ri.- ,,. tie Respondents i'i;t;0i Petition un(ier S (.cti tre an;oavii riie-o ;. : ;;;;iii;"?""?,,il:f3 ff:l,lln",",.,u,,,star ces stated in for the connecr() .,ri petnions'.o"rnng"'il/;,r'i:.ii.,i.ilri:;,r:i1?.rr%:i] vi;n;-;'i;"I'il ,')i.. hearin 3 a,c d sposa, atns '1,ili?ii3Jl;#';:: ';lil,l ll; Counsel for the petiricners: SRl. RAKESH SANGHI Counsel for the RespcrCent NO.1: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respo rdent Nos.2 to 7: SRI G. DHANANJAI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.8 to 10: ---- The Court made the following: ORDER ',& ( THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KIIMAR AND TFIE HON'BLE SRI JUISTICE N.TUKA.RAMJI WRIT ION No.83O4 of 201s ORD}]R l'l-r:; ,\ r:r l)ctition is frlcd $.iLh the follow,rngr pra.iet :; I r1tt " L (; t: . SpecicLl Court to Aci. 1 tto lt I-. ( .(. : p.1 'f p' 1t1,' r(.osons statecl in. Lhe accompanAing u-fJlctattit tt i.s lrr',, rlri oruLlr:t7 that this llctn,bte Court mar.t De Lkes?d tt) l)..) .' ct:t o,stpropirtte writ, Order or direr:t[or Dt( r() Petlt. ti t'lLt it lh.e noture of a Wnt of Ceftiorar: u ,it 11 .1.or tle. .=.r,- ls h L.G.C. Sr.No.2687/2012 and be ;tlec, s -,d to trnd set aside the order of rejecti;r )J- :, \\,2(tB7/2012 dcttect.t2.l2.20 j4 pas.sed bir tj,.e ,'pecicrl (:our! consLitute,rJ under the 1..t.. t,.li.lD) t"-: and con.seqLtentlLt, be pleased to d ir,.: )t tl e- take cogniz.t.rt:, .. ,,.f r :,o 2587/ 20l2 and ad jutlicate upon tht. so?l:, . s .) i):.tclure presL:nbed bLt laLU and be ple<t:;e -_l tc i l,llLLer or other orcler as lhis Llon,bte t,.orL, .tlo ./ 1't(i proper i.t Lhe circumstances of the L,.,tse ,, Hce :rl Carned counsel for the petitio:te,_s, . earned ) r.:rricr for Revenue appearing for resporLc.icn t No. 1 Agarrl.al, learncd counscl repr.es,rr Ltir rg Sri r,rrr-red counsel appearing for respor.dr:;tl N )s.2 to F)ar.(:! i deet I 'l i lLl

2. Govcrnmc - Sn Shviirr I G.Dhanar ri 7, ancl pcrLtsr I he record

3. It is the case of the petitioners that they had institu[cd a land grabbing case uide LGC.SR.No.2687 of 2012 on the iile of the Special Court constitutcd under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for shorl 'the Acr') inter alia asscrting that the respondent Nos.2 to 10 have grabbed thc land to an extent of 1 ,22O sq. yards out of 1,55O sq. yards belonging to the Government by fraudulently obtaining a decree and judgment, dt.21.O3.2OOO in OS.No.249 of 1994; that in order to secure the aforesaid land back to the government, [hey had instituted thc underlying LGC before the Special Court as being 'ang person' entitled to maintain a petition under Section 8( I ) of the Act to declare the unolficial respondents herein as land grabbers and to restorc the land back to [he Govcrnmen l; that thc Special Court wilhout considering thc scope and ambit of the Act and without even considering that any decree obtained by playing fraud on the Court would be null arLd uoid, had rejected the underlying LGC at SR stage itself without even taking the same on record by holding the subject petition as pima facie lrivolous and vexatious, which flnding of the Special Court it is contended as wholly unsustainable. 3 I erred irL I :.lc it.rg Pr'.i t r rt'rs fLr[her contcn.] rhat the Spc<:ial ,I r.i[ r_rna] also tha t the Gorrernment ha,.ring su fi:red an adversc ,t; l:r- in resPect of the subject lan<i in r)S.1,io.240 of 199{, 61r, .) r,scnt petition lilcd by rhe petitionors h:rtin r,r.ould not be rrrr ;rtlinable, as the same is hit by tht: pi nr:ilrle of res judicata, r.r.lf ouL appreciating that the said principi: of res be applied at the stage of taking (toilnizance of rhc Specrai Oourt Lhe appli,-.irrr, ll l;r jurlicata ( ti rr )t

5. It ::lsr, the lurther case o[ the petitioners 1].r:t they are not clairrrir,,!, (,riisterlce of any interse disputes irt respect of the subjcct lzLr;1 r r him to maintain Lhe present LG(_ lilcc b , them, but rs on .,. s, ,r lling to declare the respondents as lar d gr abbers and to res: ri | 1(. land back to the Government.

6. Pe ti.i r, . 'LtrLhcr 1994, the s:.rrrt r s; Iocated elsewhere as ciaimed b, t, , judgment irn{ i contend that insofar as . l)e la nc iteing rrnofficial respondents on the st t-crrgr h t1- the r I e'crec obLained lraudulently tn OS. \,r.2 49 of the boun larie s , rf the sult schech,rtr: .r.Ji)crly does not lxatch with the I>oUtrc ar es of the land in r,t .; - o::cupation and the unofllcial restr)orlC.nt s, by using the alirr,,s:r<r judgment and dsglss obtained lrarrclirl:ntiv are se.ekin;t l (i crtcroach on to the government lirnr I in -\, 4 posscssion of thc petitioners, which has bcen regularized their lavour in tcrms of G.O.Ms.No.166, dt. l6.02.2OOg.

7. Petrtioners in support ol their claim that thc underlying LGC as hlcd by them is maintainable being covered by Scction 8(1) of the Act, havc relied upon the decision of the Hon,ble Supreme Court in R.S.Nagak a. A.R,Antutagt.

8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the unofficial respondents by drawing attention of this court to the writ prayer would submit that it is not the casc ol_ the petitioncrs that the unofficial respondents having grabbed the land belonging to the petitioners, and on the other hand, is seeking for a relief to declare the unofficial respondents as land grabbers and to restore the land back to the government, which rclicf, the petitioners are not entitled to seek as being strangers to the propcrty

9. On bchalf of the unofficial respondents, it is further contended that the State having contested the suit ,idc OS.No.249 of 1994 filed by the father of the unofficial respondents herein to declare him as absolute owners of the ArR 1984 SC 684 5 prope rt\ .': i.ring Municipal No. 1O 1 24(Old 1.)l- + r At situated at Sarlab:, :i, I{1.derabad, and the said suit h,rvurE cecreed in favour rr[ .-r : I;_rther of the unofficial responderrt.s, 1;14 the State having - r >-efcrred any appeal thereagainst, ji is rrr>1 open for the petiric L, r;-s novrr to lile the application at lr.re tir st instance claimi,i, 1. rt thc subject land bclongs to the (i.r,e.r,ent and is to be r: rst.r ::l to the (]overnmcnt by dcclaring th : rnofficial responcicrrl:; as rand grabbers, and se cond l-.,,. Lr,r,: rr.der in C).S.No..2.19 L t 1994, having arlarned finaliW. t0. It .s rlso contended on behalf of tLL,: r nofficial responclcntr .l rr,t the term,ang person, as used in S:.ct ion B(1) of the A< :- r1 ltc,t be rearl in isolation, as if permitttnp a tv third party tc li r. z pplicatron clajming that lanc Lrtl,rn ,j11g 1o Governntc- : ::r,..rng becn grabbt:d, rnterest i - t': rr:c t of the subject property r,vithou L c:taLlis,h ng his 1 ] It is, I L-tl-rcr contended on behalf of rh,: r_1, o66i..u, respondr:n1l; lL rt since, the Government itself dir: nr,t take any steps to ar;sr;l he judgmcnt and decree in OS.Nr:.2.j9 o1 1994, the petitic,-, : rr,ho is a third party to the subjecr liln:l ,:annot approach t; e tl.ri,cial Court seeking the land in posscssion of Lhe unofllc::ir rcsllondenLs Lo bc rcstored -,,i,tcl: L. rhe 6 \l \ Government, as what the Government failed to achieve directly cannoL be achieved indirectlY

12. On behalf of the respondents it is further contended that the petitioners exccpt claiming that in respect of the land o[ thc Governmcnt in Lheir possessiou having been rcgularized by the Government under G.O.No. 166, did not estatrlish their possession over the land; and that the aforesaid regularizatron proceedings having been suspended by this Court in the wril petition filed by the unofficial respondents herein, have resorted to hling the underlying land grabbing case against the unofhcial respondcnLs hercin, only to blackmail thcm.

13. It is also furthcr contcnded by the unofficial respondents that the petitioners herein having suffered an injunction against them in a suit fited by the unofficial respondents herein uide T.A.No.1779 of 20O9, l.A.No.l8O9 of 2009 ancl t A No 87 of 2OlO in OS.No.2l05 of 20O9, have adoptcd this route without having any loctts stondL t4. The unoflicial r<:spondents lurther conlend that thc petitioners herein having been injuncted from interfering with the unofhcial respondents' possession over the suit schedule property in OS.No.21O5 of 2009, by order dt lT l2'2oo9, cannot ,/ , I l claim :' t. r posse i:l,l ;r possession of the suit schedule pr,lp lrt /, which is j,\ the unolllcial respondents undt:r :r registered c[ocu ntr I 328 Fas/i. I 5. .)rr I ,chalI of [he unofficral rcsponder: rs ]1 s furthe r slnce, the petitioncrs have sulli:r,:::l it. r adverse strit fiied by the unoflicial responcl:lnts hc-ein, Lhey agrtate the dispute relating to title of tLe subject the guise of the subject land be inc Go ,ernment the Governmcnt itseif had lo st ir s craim over pleade:L t. Li L order i:L Ll Lr seekin I 1o propert)'Lt Iand, cr.:n the sub r,<'t r icr -, r tr-tgh L r rcl.

16. B./ s r L.nq as above, it unolficie I r s:ondents that the to re-ag. Lilt I thr.] title when th,: _i r. ,r. p1,111sn1 rs con tended o:L It r I tal . ol the pe tr tiolt ers cannot Irr: p :rmitte d to the s,llrlc;t land, to aq itar-el e ;tablish of the government itsell did nor chose rts title t() ih,: subject property pc lr t ionc rsi respcct ()

17. Thc p .1 :ffLcial respondents further cont,,:rn(l .-h rr rhe i L)ni,y seeking to rcso jvc the cir.rl .i sp ute in l- e subje ct land purchased by the ,rn rlficial t t I d,,'1 1-sgi5lsred docum6nL b1, seek ng1 r Ir nvoke , r I rhe Act insteac.l of getttng the s:rrn: throughla oir r n.ctcnt Civil Court, which course of :lcL(rr- a; held the provisi:.,.r responder,: re;olved rJ by this Court in Mohd. Siddiq Ati Khqn us Shahs4n Fin6;nce Limitedz cannot be permitted, and thus, it is contended that the Civil Courl has rightly rejected the underlying LGC at SR stage itsclf, and hence, seeks for dismissal of [he present Writ Petition

18. In reply, on bchall ol the petilioncrs it is contended that in the decree obtained by the petitioners against the Government, no schedule property much less the bounclaries are given, and the same is only identificd by door numb.er, and as such, the unofficial respondents are claiming the subject land grabbed by them without having any valid title to the same.

19. On behalf o[ the petitioners it is lurLher contended that if only the LGC tilcd bv thcm is taken on record, the unofficial respondents would be required to establish that the subject land in their possession is not grabbed by them, but having valid title, by discharging the burden cast on them in terms of Scction 10 of the Act, and inasmuch as the Special Court having rejected the application filed b1, the petitioners without laking ' zooslzl nro ou s "/ -/ 9 cognizar c('. - r(- unofficial respondents woul, :s(ral ,c flrom discharsinq -- eir burden cast on 1-hem to estal-lislr th :ir valid titlc anrl p, : r;L'ssion to the sublcc)t propertv, l-rn,l tL us, the petitione r-. :':h lor setling aside thc ordcr of rejr'r'ti,lr1 pz ssccl by the Spccir,i t.' r:rt ir-r the underlying LGC. 20- Wr: hl ,': taken note of the rcspective contcntLon l r rsed

21. Tht: c, r e issue, around which the lis in lLLe [lr:sr rnt Writ Pctition -r"r L, cs is, as to u.hether a person, u,ho lrarr; I () )laint or intcrcst or ilu to the propcrl\:, can file an app1i, rliotr under Scction ll( I r I the Act, claiming that the personri rL;rrre l in Lhe :rpplicati:, - rit. e grabbed the Iand belonging to t.hc ( ]i)v( rnment or a thir(l p>l r r , u'ithout the conccrned authoritl.T'pC-son taking any step i b. ,lLemselves.

22. In rlct, to answer lhe aforesaid issue, iL;s rc:cl,sar-v to rcfcr to .;1 1 , , rf provisions of the Act and the Andlrr-.r l)radesh [,and Griil, r I ! (Prohibition) l?ulcs, 1988 (for shorL 'tlrt R rlcs').

23. Sc,rtio r .2 of the Act provides lor definirions and the relevant - r:fl :r tions read as under " Se:c.2ic 'Iand" includes rights in or over lattd. l;cne its to lr s, (ut of land and buildings. structures arrl ()tlrer thingls Li ached to the earth, or permanentll f .rst, r 5.61 16 al-]r -i ., rrlached to the carth: *&- 10 Sec.2(cc) - "land belonging to a priuate person,,mcans any land belonging to, an evacuee; a military personnr'l. or any other private individual The value or thc extent of which or the nature of the evil inr,,olved shall be of substantial nature or in the interest ofj ustice required,,.l Sec.2(d) - "land. grabber" means a person or a group of persons who commits land grabbing and includes q4g Derson who gives hnancial ard to ar-ty person for taking illega.l possession of lands or for construction of unauthorised structures thereon, or who collects or attempls to collect from an_v occupiers of such lards rent, compensation aLnd other charge s bv criminal intimidation. or who abcts thc doing of any oi the above mcntione; acts; and also includcs lhe successors rn inlcrcsl; 2(e) "land grabbing" rneans every activity ol grabbing of any land (whether belonging to the Government. a local authority, a religious or charitable institution or endowment, including a wakf, or Qnu other priuate a person or group of persons, without any Derson) by ement ald with a view to illegally taking law{ul entitl possession of such lands, or enter into or creatc illegal tenancies or lease ar-rd licences agrcements or anv other illegal agreements in respect of such lanrls. or to construct unauthorisecl structures thereon lor sale or hire, or give such lands to any person on rental or lease and licence basis for construction. or use and occupatron, of unauthorised structurcs. and thi tcrm to grab land,, shall be construed accordingly. Sec.2(g) - 'person" includes a group or body o[ pcrsons, an association, or a religtous or charitable institution or endowment, whether incorporated or not; Sec.4. Prohibition of land grabbing- (1) (2) Anu oerson who, or on after thc commencement of this Act, continues to be in occupation, otherwise than as a law{ul tenant, of a grabbed land belonging to the Government, local authority, religious or charitable institution or endowrnent 11, rncluding a wakf, or other private pr.r-sorr. sh all bc qrilty of an offence under this Act, lit:c B - Procedure and powers of the Speci:rl Co r.rt s_ 'lr: Special Court may, either suo tnct.t ( r oll ( i rr;,rl crl.iirn made by anu pe;son, officer or ilut:ror_Lt\ takc ( ,,::r . : 1, c ol and try every casc arising oul ,,f ,r r, .r lcgerl ; l ,,nd grabbing. or with respect to the orr.n,.r.: lti1,,lp1l tiL': tr , o'law{ul possession of, the land grabbe,i. ,h:ther t r:[t . rr after the commencement of th]s ,,\ct, arrd pass -.trc I i rrlc.rs (including orders by way of interirn cir e,crronsl ,.:. t I rrs fil : Sr:c..1(t.- Burden of proof - Where ln an-\ pt-,).ce(Lritgs r:nilt lhrs Act, a land is alleged to have br:er: er:rt.bcd- an: ..; ( h land is prima facie proved to br, thr lnLt o,,,ncd br tl t ilrx,ernment or by a priaate perso4 th ,. Sp er:i: Co- r rr as the case may f", tfr. Sp".iul fiib,r,_r,t';t,ull prcl.r r r : Lhat the person who is alleged to lla\,3 ; ra rbccl tlrr l,rc is a land grabber:rnd the bu"rdcn ot f",, i"l if.r, lli: lu c[ ]tas not been grabbed by him shall b,, .:,r,-,,r.h l) -'r li()lll 24 Rttle r & 6 of the Rules provides for thc p r,rct dure for making irp:r i.:ation and vcrification of such zrl)pl c:rtlrn 1lled, and it lr:, l, t:; under; "Flule I - Procedure for making application ,r Every such applicant shall contain ir slitl(:n ent in a L.trl.ise form of the material facts of thir (.-a. m ntade , documents .",i ::::si;i:. jil,:[ I r -rrcin and shall bt , ]:,r,;,:*t )-rlroses or is likely.to rely. The per.Licrrcr r;ha1l fite . I ties in ttre Court tc be verihed Oy tfre iUanc :l Rer.enue f ir er or by the Ofhcer. authorised ny tne ,rrur t rn this _r I'ralf and as many copies as are requir,:cl lot st n,ice on r l t1re respondents. Rule €r Verification of Application. &. 1,2 (1) Every applicatron filed u_ncler sub_secrion (l) of Section g of the Act or every case taken cognizalce of suo motu by the Special Court or an applicatior, Irl"d under sub section (l) of Scction 7 A of the Act, belorc thc Specral Tnbunal, mav be relerred !^o r lo,.al iuspcctron r,r r orifir.alion o, f,o,f, L1 iir. Mandal [ievenue Officer having jurisdiction over the area or by aly other Ofhcer of the Go,,lcrnment au thorised by thc Court in this behalf. (2) The Mandat Revenue Officer or the other Othcer to whom the applicatron has been referred uncler sub-rule (1) shall make or cause to be made zrn rnspection or verrlication or both, as soon as may be practicable and shall submit a full and complete report within two weeks from the date of receipt of order with reference to Revenue Records and facts on ground as to the following,- (i) the correctness of the statements made in the applicatron [x x xl fthe expresslon ,uith regard to columns I to 15 and 19 in. F.onn I, omitted bu G.O. Ms. No. 1350, Reuenue (A&R) Deparlment, clated tC).'I t.ZOl O.l; (ii) the facts relating to owncrshjps, actual posscssron and use of the land conccrned ; and (iii)such other particulzrrs and information as would be useful to the Court to arrive at a correct decision on the claims made in the application. [Prowided that the said report is not required to be submitted in re,spect of the application Frlcd by the Mandal Rcvenue Officer.l [Prouiso Added. by G.O.Ms. No. j076, Reuenue (A&R), dated. 29.1 1. 1991 .l It is also relevant to refer to Form I. application to be filed as

25. prescribed under the Act: tForm Il [substituted bg G.O.Ms. No. 1350, Reuenue (A&R) Department, dated tO. j 1.2O1O.l[Sce Rute 3] Application under sub-section (l) of Section 7_A and under sub-section (l) of Section g of Andhra pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982ToThe Special Tribuna.l (District Judge/Chief Judge, City Civil iourt. 13 Ir c : r : b,rd)The CharrmanSpecial Court unclr:r .:irr A r<lhra -r.rr.r' ;h L:rnd Grabbing (prohibition) Act, Hlrler.:ibad I J" r::en l\r icl ?1, pplicants l-li'spondents :: iJrtion of the Applicant: s I il)tion of the Respondents: , s. Siatement/briel facts o[ lhe case: r:.r 'rf Action: ; li,'r ion' Lr rltheLand: r]-herc are any llouses or structures c,t tle latrd, to 'Lc, llelong, how thel.lr,,crc acquired; Market r tlirc tl thr: lo reiation statemenL bet\i,een the Surl.ev il td SLlb l,t tsion o[ lhe lasl Rc survey donc an, tlr ]rrivous r I,ee. ) (r .lL \,lr)l L, rr Lr !( l() I ( i \( l t, I r he Appli.ant A rr 1,l r I \ (' 1 i, tton I lh iLtr,^.e named applicant do hereby declar,l ,lla the rr]lt.I s .l the application are true and correct lo tlr( brsl oj- 'rr' l. ,,r ltdee, bcliel and inlormation. Ijence vrrifre d or thts 'lrr- day of month .20 _ . Al)p icant of Prspg!!y ' ,)l tlre Village/ Municipality/ Corporation r,rl tlte Mandal: r (]1 the District: i i, rtron ofthe Land: l lJLrmber and Sub division: r < :r: ics of Suwey Number of adjacent land.r r.1s1 iSouth : West :List of Documents Date of Docllment l)c;cription I .) .l + J () \ S (_ t. :JL Ils C,r, l: a pplicant" 26 r\ .,r r ) nr reading of the provisions of th(r Ac t al rng with Lhc rulr:; 1 : rc cl thcre under as cxtractecl abor c. n p lrtlcular considcl. -S -aL the initial burden is on the pers,rn;lileFing land L4 .l grabbing to prove the land is owned by Government or private person as the case may be, it would be clear that it is only an aggrieved party, which can ltle an application inr.oking the provisions of the Act, against the personfs) named thercin having resorted to an act of land grabbing and consequently, to declare him/ them as 'land grabber' undcr the Act, be it Government in respect of a government land or a private person in respect of his land or of local body and not a inler uiuos.

27. Thus, if a government land is grabbed, it is only Lhe government, which can initiate action. Simitarly, if Iand of a charitable institution or a waqf is grabbed, it is the concerned religious or charitable institution or waqf, u.hich is re<luired to initiate action by filing necessary application. 2a. The above position would be further clear, if onc looks at Rule 3(4) of the Rules, and the application lhat is required to bc submitted in Form-l requiring to disclose the cause of aclion. As per the aforesaid Ru1e, the person filing application has to enclose the relevant documents, and only upon the person making an application in Form-l enclosing relcvant documents to establish his interest in respect ol the subject to property being claimed as grabbed by the person named in the 15 applic€ :rr iLS respondent, the same can be r-al.:,:rr cn record, and nr:r, ), rrlerred for legal inspeclion or vcrrillcrLtiorL by the rcvenui )l.titis

29. l'- ,1 . rr ihird partv to the land merely b]. all,rgir-r 1 that the silbjec't r r is grabbed, cannot file or maintain :n a rplication under tlr' I r,t', isions of the Act claiming that [hr: sr_rlJ(]ct land belong:r to r:: iL government, private party, locerl borlv, religious or charilrr rl : rnstitution, including waqf, withoLtt tt.rr: ctncerned party, li) r, r:: rrr the subject land belongs, havinlg tt-e.nselves not inr liatjr rrt i r, zrr:tion.

30. Ir: .l r iacls ol Lhe prese nL case , though 1t is 1_h I case of thc pet ) 1rs rhar thc subject land is a govcr]rl rr1 and and Lhe uno['- r r I r-r:spondents having encroached I 1e s:rm ], .rs the unoffici:r. :sytondents having hled a suit ar]ainst the Cioverntltct r t{) cleclare themselves as absolute (),yn.rs c f subject land ar,l It'(lovernment on contest having lost thc: |ase. the petition: -s, iitlo[ persist with the said claim of :hr: subiect land being :L 11:)\ r, itrlcnr land. [t is not shown to this C rLrrt that the governnr(.r :t,rrng aggrieved by the said decisir:r.r lra-/irrg taken further ; r: I rr r bl prcl'erring an appeal. 16 3 1 . When the governme nt, which had initially laid claim lo the land as belonging to them and having lost the case, it is not open to a third party., like the petitioners, to plead thc case of the government.

32. Thus, the reading of the term ,ang person, as used under Scction 8(1) of thc Act, in the manner as sought to bc reacl b,v the petitioners, would result in a distorted meaning being giver.r to the said term out of context and beyond the framework of the Act, rn hich cannot be permitted.

33. Though on behalf of the petitioners it is contended thar part of the subject land, alleged Lo be grabbed by the unofficial respondents, having been regularized in their favour by the Government under G.O.Ms.No. i66, inasmuch as the said GC) has bcen suspended by this Court, thc pcttlioners cannot continue lo claim the subject land as government land.

34. Insofar as the claim of the petitioners to be in possession ol the part of the subject land aileged grabbed by the unoflicial respondents is concerned, unless and until the petitioners admit to the fact of being in possession of the subject land in violation of the interim injunction, d1.17.12.2O19 in OS.No.2l05 1,7 o[ 200!r, I r,, r claim oi the unolficial responrlcr.tts d sLurbing thr:ir prts, -e. . : i trt r.ltnnot bc acccptcd

35. 'l'lt o r-t .1tr ihc petitioners have contendec tha rhe Iand being cl:L 'r .l lx. the unofficia] rcspondents is rtn6 s, z decree, there is rrr s,:tllcrdule of the property with bourrrl:,rir s being claimed br I e unofficial respondents, and the samr: i ; ir lentified by door :LL r r.tc,r, it is not for the petitioners to ,:la im that unolficia I t r :r r';lde nts on [he basis o[ the sale dc ed rs sr pratting on the ,lrl I tt thc gove rnmonr, r,l,hile the l,rol,cr t_r under rcgisterc sl l, r Cr:ed is locatcd clscr,vhere

36. Th: S.r_'::jal Cor_rrt n,hile rejecting the u:,rde rJyirrg LGC appiicariorr ii: l b-r,. the peritioncrs herein has rightll rroled that even if 1il( I ' r('sporldent-S[aLe had filed the L(,iC egai tst the unofficial r,r r-:_ n.lents seeking declaration that it is [{ove .nment Iand, it \\ oli 1 not have bee n maintainable, in .rreri. of the judgment iLn I rler:ree grantcd rn OS.No.249 of 1994 rr hi:h had attained llf zr li r . ancl since the 1"r respondent, ir,.hrt r:or ld not r -.],J having snfft_'red a decree, cannc,l marn[a,n I s r-i.' said land rhrough third parties 'i , r br rhe pct itioners ht.rcin. lil e the claim rh c nc irecLly applicatrcr ) ) br- J 18

37. Furthcr, the reliance placed by the petitioners on thc decision o[ Lhe Apex Court in R.S.Nayak's case (1 supra), as regards the ambit of the term 'anA personJ is oul of contcxl and would not advance the case of the petitioners.

38. In view of the analysis of the provisions rela[ing to the Act and Rules in rela[ion to the scheme of the Act, this Court is oi thc vieu' that the application filcd by the petitioners before the Special Court is clcarly wilhout any sanction under thc Act.

39. l'hus. the order of thc Special Court in rejecting tht: application filed by the petitioners by not recognizing thc pe[itioners as 'ang person' entitled to maintain the underlying applicati<>r-r, in the considercd view of this Court, is in accordancc with the prorisiuns of tl-re Act, and thc Special Court has rightly hcld that Lhe petitioners are not cntitled to initiaLc action under rhc A( l by liling thc underlying application'

40. Thus, this Court secs no mcrit in the prescnt writ petition and thc same is devoid of merit.

41. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed' No order as to costs. '=-- 19 !

42. (- r ,.-i ;1161usn [ly, miscellaneous petitionr;. :1 an g, pending shall r;ta r,1 closed. //TRUE COPY// SiD/.P GOWRI SHANKAR A:SSIS-TANT REGISTRAR ISECTION OFFICER I To,

1. One C(l to l;RI RAKESH SANGHI Advocate [OPU() 2. Two C(ls tr: (iP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State: o Telangana louTl

3. One Cr-: :c S Rl G DHANANJAI Advocate IOPUC] Two C I C,.)l,ies 4 KKS GJP tt*- \ ,\(]ATION COU,RT HIGH COUR-' DATED:281a!t12025

1.; ';A ria O C .\ ', q, { o +. i,, r ORDER WP.No.8304 of 2015 DISMISSINCi THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \?