The High Court · 2025

5. Mr. G. Nagesh, S/o G. Ramreddy, aged 43 years, Occ Business RJo Velkatur (V), Balconda (M), Nizamabad District

6. S. Rajendra Kumar, S/o S. Pochaiah, aged 64 years, Occ Retired, Rl/o H.No. 1 8-9-204, Kesavigiri, Near Chand rayangutta, Hyderabad.

7. Arsanapalli Jagadish Mitra, S/o A. Pullaiah'aed 40 years, Occ. Software Engineer Rl/o now Resident of. 316, Cobblestone lane, Edison, New Jersey, USA. Represented by his GPA Holder and father Sri A. Pullaiah S/o A. Chandraiah Aged 65 years, Occ. Retd. Employee R/o Flat No.303, Sri Sai Srinivasa Nivas MES Colony, West Venkatapuram Secunderabad. R7 is impleaded as per C.O.dt. 21.12.2023 in lA No. 1tZO1g. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 calling for thq records and to set-aside G.o.Ms.No. 692 Revenue (uc.lv) Department dated 29.6.2011 and endorsement in Application No. cl455t52t2oo6 c.c.No. 1t13347176 dated 3.8.2011 respectively with a consequential direction by confirming the regularization of plot No. 187 in favour of the petitioners viiie the acknowledgement of the special officer and competent Authority Urban Land ceiling, Hyderabad dated 8.3.2004 in the interest of justice. LA. NO: 1OF 2012(WPMP. NO : 50970 OF 20121 Petition under section 'ls1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the operation of G.o.Ms.No. 692 Revenue (uc.lv) Department dated 29.6.2011 in the interests of Justice and pass such other or further order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. pending .disposal of the above writ petition. t.A. NO: 10F 2014MW MP. NO: 2411 OF 2O14 Between: Mr. G. Nag.-e-sh,.S/o G. Ramgg!{y, aged 43 years, Occ Business R/o Velkatur (V), Balconda (M), Nizamabad Distriit ...PETITIONER AND

1. 2 3 M. Sree Ramulu Naidu, S/o late M.Jaigopal Naidu, aged about Sg years, Occ Business { Vishr'1u Mohan Naidu, S/o late M. Jaigoopal Naidu, aged about 57 years, Occ Busines Smt. PAdmini, D/o late M. Jaigopal Naidu, aged about,56 years, Occ Business All are Rt/o H.No. 9-64, HMT Nai;ar, Nacharim Vifiage, ftiOiraOaO. -

4. The state of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its principal secretary, Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, tti9g, Secreiariat, ttyOe#UiO - ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS --'-----/

5. The Special Officer, Urban Land Ceiling, Secretariat, Hydera bad. 6. The Special Chief Secretary, and Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

7. M/s HMT Officers Cooperative House Building Society Limited, represented by its President, office at Flat No.208, B Block, Kushal Tower, Khairthabad, Hyderabad.

8. S. Rajendra Kumar, S/o S. Pochaiah, aged 64 years, Occ Retired, R/o H.No. 1 8-9-204, Kesavigiri, Near Chand rayangutta, Hyderabad. ...RESPON DENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased vacate the interim orders passed in W.P.M.P.No. 50970 ol 2012 in W.P.No.40154 of 2012 on 31-12-2012. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI ERANKI PHANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1to3 : GP FOR ASSIGNMENT Counsel for the Respondents No.4to6 : -- Counsel for the Respondent No.7 : SRI P.VITTAL RAO The Court made the following: ORDER I J HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4Ol54 of 2Ol2 ORDER: This writ petition is hled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief "...1o issue a Writ of Cerltorari calling for the records and to set-aside G.O.Ms.No.692 Reuenue (UC.N) Department, dated 29.6.201 1 ond endorsement in AppLication No.G/ 455/ 52/ 2OO6 C.C.No.1/ 13347/ 76, dated 3.8.2011 respectiuely tuith e conseqtLentiol direction bg confirming tlLe reguloization of Plot No.187 i.n fauour of the petitior,"ers uide the ctcltnouledtl mert o|the Special OJftcer & Compelent i.uthoritg Urbctn Lond Ceiling, Hgderabo d dated 8. 3. 2 AO4... "

2. Ccnsiderecl the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record

3. It is stated that the petitioners' father, uiz., late M.Jaigopal Naidu was an ex. Employee of HMT, Hyderabad. It is further stated that the officers of HMT formed into a Cooperative House Building Society and the Society has purchased Ac.25.0O gts., of land in Sy.Nos.590, 588 (part), 589 (part) and 591 (part), situated at Alu,al Village, Jonnabanda,' il,fat^.jgi.l Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is also stated that subsequent to the purchasing of the property, disputes arose over the nature of the lands and its classihcation and thus, the society made representations to the Government seeking exemption under \- ) CVBR. J Wp_40154 2012 Section 2O of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'the Act, 1976) and divided the entire land into various housing plots and allotted to its members. It is further stated that the petitioners' father was allotted plot No.187, admeasuring 2B8.OO sq. yards by the society uide allotrnent letter, dated 29.O3.1990, after collecting requisite amount towards cost of the plot. It is further stated that Sri M. Jaigopal Naidu died intestate on 7.10. i993 leaving behind his wife, 3 sons and one daughter and subsequently, his wife and one of his son died and consequent i6 u,hich, the petitioners hcrein succeeded to the said allotrnent made in fa-rour of their father. It is further stated that during- pendency of the proceedings before ULC authority, the declarant, who is the pattadar, has filed declaration under the provisions of the Act and after computation of the iand, thg lend in possession of the society was declared as surplus land aird the same was taken over by the Governmbnt under the provisions of the Act. It is further stated that the Government as a policy has issued G.O.Ms.455 Revenue (U.C.l) Department, dated 29.O7 .2OO2 and other G.Os for considering the cases for regularizaLion of the plots, which are in occupation of the third parties and which are vested in the State under the provisions of the Act. It is further stated that the then President of the society colluded with the Power of -' 3 C!'BR, J Wp {0154 2012 Attorney holders of land owners and tried to sell away the land in possession of the society for a wrongful gain and entered into a clandestine deal executing a registered'sale deed bearing ciocument No.458 of 2OO2, dated 22.2.2002 in fan our of respondent No.5. It is further stated that the petitioners' father being the allottee of PIot No. 187 has made an application seeking regularization of the said plot and at the same time, respondent No.5 also filed an application seeking regularization of the very same plot under the very same GO. The case of.the petitioners is that a registered sale deed has been allegedly executed by respondent No.6 in favour of respondent No.S in respect of the very same plot No.187, referring to a fabricated house number as 5- 1015/ 3l 187 for land admeasuring 267 .OO sq. yards, however, the fact remains that there never existed any house either on the date of registration of the sale deed or till date. Th-e grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents, instead of regularizing the plot No.187 in favour of them, have wrongly incorporated the name of respondent No.S in the revenue records uide G.O.Ms.No.692, dated 29.6.2011. Hence, this writ petition.

4. Sri D.V. Chalapathy Rao, learned Government Pleader for Assignment has stated that in terms of the application l-tled by respondent No.5 under the GO issued by the Government, 4 6 CVBR, J wp_40154 2Ot2 seeking for regolaization of plots, respondent No.S has enclosed all the documents in support of his possession over plot No. 187 and also the registered sale deed bearing document No.458 of 2OO2, dated 22.2.2OO2 executed by respondent No.6 and therefore, the case of respondent No.S has been considered for regularization and accordingly, regularization proceedings have been issued in his favour.

5. A perusal of the record would reveal that the petitioners are disputing the saie deed executed by respondent No.6 in favour of respondent No.5, its authenticity and genuineness. Whereas, the regularization orders have been passed by the Government uzde G.O.Ms.No.692, dated 29.6.2011 regularizing plot No.187 in favour of resooncient No.S re$ng upon the alleged sale deed executed by respondent No.6. There is a serious dispute with regard to the allotment of plot No.lg7 made by the societ5r in favour of the petitioners, father and on the other hand, there is a dispute with regard to filing of declaration by the pattadar and the land being exempted under the provisions of the Act and the vendor of respondent No.5 executing the sale deed and its genuinity.

6. In view of the above, this Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is self restrained to decide the validity or otherwise of the title of the petitioners, 7 5 CVBR, J Wp-{0t54_2012 vendor society as well as the vendor of respondent No.5. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition relegating the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court and institute a comprehensiv-e civil suit disputing the right and entitlement of the vendor of respondent No.S, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of such suit being filed, the trial Court shall dispose of the same without being influenced by any observations made by this Court or the regularization orders issued by the Government in favour of respondent No.S. The parties are directed to maintain status quo over the subject property existing as on today, in all respects, for a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Before expiry of the said period, they are entitled to file an appropriate application before the competent Civil Court and seek appropriate relief, in accordance with law.

7. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// I Sd/- A. V. S. PRASAD DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTICifiIOFFICER I3s,?'g:P.1::3i't?J":ii*hil9,.1113fl :,ilj"L%'Jj'tion)Repea,Act, The Special Officer, Urban Land Ceiling, Secretariat, Hydera bad. To, 1 2 3 The Soecial Secretariat- Chief Secretarv, and Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Hyderabad. ,4....':

4. One CC to SRI ERANKI PHANI KUMAR, Advocate. [OPUC] 5 One CC to SRI P.VITTAL RAO, Advocate. [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR ASSIGNMENT, High Court for the State of Telangana

7. Two CD Copies. BSK \ HIGH COURT \ \ CVBR,J DATE D :0 510312025 .Q, i' ,) I r-,1r li." .9 a * $\ '$ ,) I ORDER WP.No.4O154 of 2012 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS { 1r.1 :it.