High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. 2 3 4 5 ...PETITIONER The State of.Telangana, Rep by its principal Secretary, Revenue Department. (stamps and Regislration), Dr. i3.R.Ambebtar sh;va,'s".r.irri"t,-H-ioiirtlj. The District Regislr,Ar Hy{era[a(, At Amgerpgt, Hyderabad. The Commissioner and lnsoector General of Registration and Stamps, Telangana, Hyderabpd The Sub- Registrar, CharminAr, Hydqrqbqd. The Telangang State Wakf B.oard, Represented by its Chief Executive Offlcer, - --' l{aving office at Hej House, publtc caioen r.riHpatr;]uiyourabad T S. ..,RESPoNDENTS ^ -^ _L:tlT! u.nqer Artiqle ??9 q! tl-,e Constitution qf tndia prayins thar in the :':^T:t1lt9t Etate.q.in.ll9 affid-avit filed 11l"ru*,,n, the Hish court ma-v be pteased Io rssue an qppropriate !V1it or Ordgr/ s or Diiection/ s more partic(lariy one in the nature. of \A1rit of Manfl6mug to declare the action of the responO"nt. ,or" the peritioner prem is6s No' iz_s zs, P: {":la1v^ t!u,^ Ie:qp!d9n!^I-ojS^ 1n."e1t9r1nq r3!.?2^5=39:22_53A, 22-5-24 ta 22_5_26,22',-5_44t1, 22-5_45,"22_5_253, 22_5- ?? ?2 F.,?e tp 12 g.a2 situated at Charminar, uyolraoJ*t;;ii;," ??,!o_23:u notrficailsn under Sestion 22_A of the Resisrration Act as iilesat, :-"Jig^::y,yfl9 vrolalion of principle of nalurat justice and consequenfly set aside Jhe ?i?l]|,?lY Rl"ipljrl^,1T-",1:r.1.9 bv th9 rgs.qoqdent No. 5 F No S_28l covtJ2o2o dated 2.t_ yl-ty!1an drrecr th9 respgndQnt No.3 to remqve lhe petitioner premises No. 22-5- ?e, ??-130, ?2-5-38,22-548,22 s- 24 to Z2-s-26, zz'-s-qq1,ii2:s:-;;:;i-s:;$, 22-5-32 to 22.5-34, ?2-5-39 to Z2-i4Z situated at Ctrarminar, HyOe-r";;j;;-thu prohibition list 3o; IANO:1OF2 023 I ,l / i ,l t I

Petition un(tor i ection '151 CPC praying that in the circurrslances stated in the affidavit filed ir : upport of the pei'tion, the High Court may be pleased to by the respondent No 5 in F No'S-28r Ciovt/2020 dated ,rrpunO the lette ,, i1-oi-iozl putting t r : when petitioner premises N-o ?2'5-?9: ?:' 5 10^' ??P ?6' iz s za,22-s-24 ,i ;',-s-?a,2i-5-44t1' 22-1!,5' 22-5-253' 22'5 32 to 22-5'34' 22- 5-39 Io 22-5-42 si r- a : tj at Charminar, Hyderabad in prohibition list counsel for the F'e'ti ioner: sRi B. MAYUR REDDYREPRESENTII{G FOR SRI' MIRZA SHAH NAVI/Il': BAIG ',ud counsql for the Flers rondent Nos''l !q 4: AGP FoR STAMP$ AND REGISTRATION Counsef for the Rt:s rondent No.S; SRI FABAIdAN AZAM KHAN SiC FOR WAKF BOARQ The Court made thre following; OR9ER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH ORDER: WRIT PETITION No.32244 of 20.23

1. Heard Sri B.May.ur Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Iearned Assistant Government pleader for Stamps and Registration and the learned Standing Counsel for Wakf Board, appearing for the respondents.

2. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that in this writ petition the petitioner is questioning the Ietter issued by ttre respondent No.5 in Letter F.No. s-28 / Govt / 2o2o d,ated 2 r.o2.2o23, direcring the respondent No.3 not to entertain any transactions in respect of the number of properties including the properties of the petitioner premises bearing Nos. 22-5-29, 22-5-30, 22-5-36, 22_5_38, 22_5_24 to 22_5_26, 22-5-44 / | , 22-5-45, 22-5-253 , 22 S_32 to 22_5_34 , 22_5_ 39 to 22-5-42, situated at Charminar, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred as ,subject properties,) without there i, * IIf l 2 being anv ;,r .[ Notihcation Under Section 22'A of tl:,e Registratrttr ,r. , and requested to direct the resp'lndents to remove th:' 'ubject properties from the prohib ti'ln list'

3. The lear r'-:d Senior Counsel for the petitione r would that the subject properties t>f teis writ further subr petition ilr€ tl I subject matter in O'S'No'989 of 1')73 and O.S.No.7l] tl '974 on the hle of IX Assistant Jucige' City Civil Court, I 'cierabad and the respondent No' i rlerein is also one ol' tl , defendant in the said suits' The subject properties \ri( I rl shown as 'A-Schedule propertie";' in the saidsuitszr:.declaredthatthescheduleprooertiesnot belongs to !v'; ',:f ProPertY

4. The lezl red Senior Counsei for the petitic'ner also submits trzi the respondent No'5 issued liolification' which u,as ,ublished on 14'06'1984 in A'P'ilazettee' Supplemenl o Part-II, wherein the sullject frroperfes herein wer,-' ',hown as Wakf properties Chal enging the sarne, Sz'kr r :ra Begum, who was the plaintiff 1n 3 O.S.No.73 of I9Z4 filed W.p.No .2719 of 1996 and the said Writ Petition was allowed on 30. I7.2OO7 declaring the said Gazette Notification dated 14.O6.19g4 issued by the respondent No.5 as contrary to the Decree made in O.S.No.73 of \974 on the file of IX Assistant Judge, Civil Court, Hyderabad and declared that the plaint_A schedule properties therein, which are the subject properties herein, as Mathruka property,. Aggrieved by the said Order, the respondent_Wakf Board filed appeal vide W.A.No. I9Z4 of 2OO3 and the Division Bench of this Court after hearing both sides, dismissed the said Writ Appeal on 20.1 1.2003 and thereby the declaration of the schedule properties as not belong to Wakf property and they are the Matruka prope.rty has attained its hnality.

5. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would further submit that when the petitioner approached the respondent No.4 on 04.IO.2O23 for execution and registration of lease deeds in respect of the subject -., \l -. - I 4 l properties rle respondent No'4 refused to l'epr'ister the - SameSt-a:jl].thattheSubjectpropertiesa]eunder Prohibit.t:d li;'.. The said action of the responderrt No'4 is contrary to '.he Judgment and Decree pasr;erl by the competen, rl r"il Court in O'S'No '73 of 19'74 Fl'rther the impugned ('tter issued by the respondt:nt No'5 in F.No.S-128 1( :vt./2O2O d'ated' 2l'O2'2O23 is cc'ntrary to the Orders r,,Lssed by this Court in W'P No'2711) o'f 1996' dated 130 l( 200 1 and also W A'No' 1974 o1' 2CrO3' dated

20.|l.,,zoo!i:lnd.requestedtosetasidetheimpullnedletter in F.Nrr -c ,),8lGovt' l2O2O dated 21 o') '2023 and conseqlterrt rtl orders, in so far as the subjecr- pr'rperties of the petition't'is concerned and requested to allcrw the writ petition. Stamps

6. The r'arned Assistant Government Pleader for C Registration would sr'rbrnil that the No.4 has rightly rejected the I'eqrLest of the respondt:tl1 petitione r 1 -r registration of the lease deeds trar';ing on the )? 5 letter addressed by the respondent No.S, wherein the respondent No.4 was directed not to entertain any kind of transactions in respect of the subject priorities. He further submits that until and unless the impugned letter dated 21.02.2023 issued by the respondent No.S is set aside, the respondent No.4 cannot register the documents presented by the petitioner and requested to dismiss the writ petition

7. The learned Standing Counsel for Wakf Board, basing on the counter filed by the respondent No.5 would submit that to safeguard the Wakf properties from the encroachers and land grabbers, the respondent No.5 had addressed letter to the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration and also the respondent No.3 with a request to issue necessary instructions to all the Sub-Registrars in Telangana State not to entertain aly kind of tralsactions in respect of the properties shown in the Prohibition list by putting them under ,Auto Lock, \t .t 6 .llt online registratton module o - disabling properties. I The lear r'.:d Standing Counsel would lurll-er submit ';4 of the Transfer Propertl' o1' A<rt' 1882 that, Secttrl -t read with fi':r tion 17 of the Indian Registration A:t' 1908 conclusivellttrandatesforregistration<lf'1r:erlofan immovabie p ')perty for its enforcement' The Fe5:istration ofDeedt.zrrr,rgrecitalsfortransferofrigLLt,'itl.eand -"vour of recipient along u'ith re'citals of interest in considerali:r: r^'; give inference of presumption ol'title The executirln :r' lease deed itself is under clou<l' then the registral.ic rr r t.self cannot be hetd as proof cl' :xecution and comlrliz ltce under Section 67 of the Evicler.rce Act is necessary g. The le rued Standing Counsel would firlttrer submit that thr: 1l ri I rary contention of the petitiotrer tlla I the Wakf propertv. u -' ich is the subject property of the il lstant writ petition, 'r:'L<l been alienated by the lega ht:irs of the /.' 7 -- Inamdars or by the then Mutawalli or their agents or assignees is irrelevant and it was done in contravention of the Wakf Act \gg5 / tg}4 being void ab initio. The petitioner cannot circumvent the law on the basis of some previous transactions that had taken place and the contention of the petitioner that he is the legal owner of subject properties is untenable. The Mutawali cannot be the owner of the subject Wakf lands. The Mutawali ls the custodian ald caretaker of the Wakf properties being the Manager for the time being only. The petitioner has sought for perpetuation of illegality, contrary to the settied principles of law ald that being the absence of any right, whatsoever grant lease of the Wakf properties is not maintainable and there are no merits and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

10. After hearing both sides and perusing the record, this Court is of the considered view that, the subject properties i.e. Nos.22-5-29, 22-5-30, 22-5-36, 22-5-38. I \ 8 22-5-24 1o |22-5-26, 22-5-4411, 22-5 45' t'2-5-253' 22-5-32 tc .',2-5-34, 22-5-39 to 22'5-+2' s;itrrated at Charmina.- iiyderabad were shown as 'A' schedule properties .r 1).S.Nos.g89 of 1973 and O S No 7i\ ol 1974 on the fi1.' of IX Assistant Judge, Citv (livil Court' Hyderabati t lrcl in the said suit, the A'P'Wakf Board was thedefenrlarlNo.2.Afterconductingtrralllldmarking documentsr..;exhibits,theCivilCourtdecierrec.thatthe Piaint-A scl: rlule properties i'e' the subject properties in the insr-anl 'vrit petition are 'Mathruka procerty' and further ,1e:<:l., rred that they are not Wakf propert ies

11. Irullh r'. one Ms.Sakeea Begum, thr: plair-rtiff in o.S.No.7l}cf7974filedW.P.No.2719of]ggriqlrestioning the Gazettt Notihcation, Supplement trl Part II-' 23-A' dated 1'1.( (,.1984 under S1'No'1297 at Page No'20 declaring 1,1 ': subject properties as Wakf Prrlp':rties and the learre'c lSingle Judge of this Court allc'r"erl the said writ pet-iti,rr by its order dated 30'11.200 1, u4lerein it was 9 dated 14.06.1984 1S held that the said Notihcatron contrary to the decree made in O'S'No'7 3 of 1974 in so far as the subject ProPertres are concerned and declared as Mathruka Property' Aggrieved bY the said orders' the respondent No'5 herein' filed W'A'No' 1974 of 2O03 and the Division Bench of this Court dismissed the said Writ Appeal vide its order dated 2O'll'2OO3' The Division Bench of this Court in the said Writ Appeal held that the Single Judge was justified in holding that the Notifrcation under Section 5 of the Wakf Act' 1954 cannot be issued by the Wakf Board subsequent to passing of a d'ecree by the Civil Court which decision taken by competent Civil Court at the relevant time' was affirmed in the appeal' The Judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the said Writ APPeal has attained its frnalitY' In view of issue the the same, now the resPondents cannot impugned list including the subject ProPerties for Section 22-A (l\C of the Registratron prohibition under Act, 1908' l I :: l0:: \

12. In thr: <: denied alror W.P.No.271ll i,.rnter hled by the respondent No.;i. norvhere the orders passed 'by this Oourt in -f 1996 dated 30.11.200 1 and dis,nissal of W.A.No.I974 set asicle 11- :rf 2003 dated 20.11.2003. Once tttis Court ' Gazette Notihcation Supplen.rent Part-ll, dated 1a ()tr. )')84 in so far as the subject prcptrties are concernecl iu ,l declared that the same not belong,; to Wakf property arc .t is Mathruka property, whi,:l-r r,r'as affirmed by the I)i,zis ;,n Bench of this Court in W.-a'. \c .1974 of 2OO3, r,he :espondent authorities ci1nlt o t address impugned lc ,,er including the subject proptrr'1.ir s in the prohibiterd ir once again and the said actiorl ls rrrbitrary, illegal a nc I 'o1e to be set aside on the grottrrd that the same is cot'r ''ary to the orders passed by t.-r s Court in W.P.No.1l7l'- of 1996 dated 30.10.2001 ald "\,.A.No.1974 of 2003 dz.1r: I 20. 1 1.2003.

13. The o.t r r contentions raised by the respror-rrlent No.5 *cZfnnot be 1, rl,:en into account as the 'ssrle \,/a:; already

7./ ::11:: settled in the earlier proceedings by the competent civil Court as well as this Court wherein it was held that the subject ProPerties not belongs to Wakf ProPertY and it belongs to Mathruka Property 1n issued by respondent No'S Inviewoftheabovefindings,thisWritPetitionis t4. disposed of bY setting aside the impugned Prohibition letter F.No.S-2S/G ovt.l2O2O dated 2l'O2'2O23 and consequentia'I letter in Memo No'G3 16211202l dated 26.05.2023 issued by the respondent No'3 in so far as the suit schedule properties of the petitioner is concerned i.e. Nos.22-5-2g, 22-5-30' 22'5-36' 22-5-38' 22-5-24 to 22-5-26, 22-5-4411,22-5-45' 22-5-253' 22-5-32 to 22-5- 34,22-5-gg to 22-5-42' situated at Charmrnar' Hyderabad and the Registering Authority is directed to receive, register and release the documents presented by the petitioner for the suit schedule properties' subject to the petitioner complying with the provisions of the Indiart l I I ..tr., Registration r.:t, 1908 and Indian Stamps Act 1899 and otherwistt rr ,r'der.

15. As a ri( ( uel thereto, miscellaneous petitionr;, if any' pending in I r:; writ petition, shall stand close<1 SD/.P //TRUE COPY// . CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA i oep'ulv REGISTRAR SEC:TION OFFICER To, 1 The Princi6' zLl li:)cretary, Revenue Departme tamps an(l t iegistration). Dr B R Amherl l..ia Elhava, Secretariat, HYderabad The Distrrct R ] Jistrar Hyderabad, At Ameerpet' Hyderabad' The Comn i';s r:ter and lnspector General of Registration and Stamps' Telangana, H 'ierabad The Sub- Il'r( ';trar, Charminar' Hyderabad The chief Fxr , rtive otticer, Telangana $tatg wakf Board H;rving office at ffH';;'+' p ,ii.'c.,o"n Nampaliv' Hvderabad' T S OneCCtcll:l.MIRZASHAHNAWAZBA|GAdvocateiCPtlcl one cc tc, sr I FARAHAN A4AM KHAN SC F9R-WlfF Eroi\RD IOPUCI FOR STAMPS AND iiE9ISTRATION ,HiI]h QOUIT fOT thc TWO CCS C 'iI' State ol 1,,r3 -13na. [OUT] Two CD Ccp:"t; 1 i I 3 4 5 6 7 8 I KKS BS Po^c. HIGH COURT DATED:0810412A25 ORDER WP.No.32244 * 2023 t :z=:=::- -re:. Ilf, / J' (: 2 l) lil" \ 0'r5 ( .t D 'o*::? l.<-; r:7 1 .:r\ --:a ,,,r4 DISPOSING l HE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CC STS >-"\s lrf