✦ High Court of India · 07 Jan 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 07 Jan 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
07 Jan 2025
Bench
Length
1,715 words

Acts & Sections

6. Sri Peddabanolla Kistamma, Wo.Late P.Buchaiah, aged 45 years, Occ: Labour, F/o.H.No.1-12, Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga-Reddy District - 501 503. 7. Sri Peddabanolla Paramesh, S/o.Late P.Buchaiah, aged 49 years, Occ: Labour, R|/o.H.No.1-12, Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District - 501 503. 8. Peddabanolla Jangaiah, S/o.Late P.Buchaiah, aged 21 years, Occ : Labour, Rl/o.H.No.1-12, Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Reddy Didtrict - 501 503. 9. Peddabanolla Laxmi, W/o.Late P.Narsimhulu, aged S0 years, Occ : Labour, Rl/o.H.No-1-1, Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Reddy Distiict - 501 503. '10. Peddabanolla Shankaraiah, S/o,Late P.Ramaiah, aged 49 years, Occ : Labour, Rl/o.H.No.1-14, Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District - 501 503. 1 '1. Peddabanolla Balaiah, S/o. Late Peddabanolla Ramaiah, aged 35 years, Occ : Labour, Rl/o.H.No.1-1 , Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Reddy Disirict - S01 503. 12.Pedda Srinivas, S/o.Late P.Ramaiah, aged 32 years, Occ : Labour, RIo.H.No.1-1, Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District - 501 503. 'l3.Pedabanolla Venkatamma, Wo.Late P.Chinna Jangaiah, aged 75 years, Occ : Household, R/o.H.No. l-1'1 , Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District - s01 50s.

14. Peddabanolla Kistaiah,S/o.Late P.Chinna Jangaiah, aged 5,1 years, Occ : Labour, Rl/o.H.\o.l-11, Tangadapalli, Chevella, Ranga Redd,r' District - 501 503.

15. Peddabanolla Valiesh, S/o.Late P.Chinna Jangaiah, aged 54 years, Occ : Labour, Fl/o.H.No.6-'1 16/76, Jawahar Nagar Colony, Beeramg .ida, Ameenpur Mandal, Sanga Reddy District.

16. Peddabanolla lrrakash, S/o.Late P.Chinna Jangaiah, aged 41 years, Occ : Labour, R/o.H.No.6-1 16/76, Jawahar Nagar Colony, Beeramguda, Ameenpur Mandal, Sanga Reddy District.

17. Peddabanolla Kanthaiah, S/o.Late P.Chinna Jangaiah, aged 44 years, Occ : Labour, F/o.H.No.6-1 16/82, Jawahar Nagar Colony, Beeramgrrda, Ameenpur Mandal, Sanga Reddy District. (PP 6 to 17 are brought on record s LR's of deceased petitioner Nos.1 to 3 as per Court Order dated 16-9-2022 in l.A.No.1 to 3of 2021 ) PETITIONERS AND 1 . lt/d. Khaja, S/o.lt/ohd. Khasim, (Died per LR's 6 to '13) Businessr Ryo.Tangadpally Village,fr/oinabad Mandal, Rangareddy Distric:. 2. Md. Mohaboob. S/o.lr/ohd. Khasim Agriculture R/o.Tangadpally Village,Moinabad lvlandal, Rangareddy District. (Died per LR s t:i to 13) 3. Md. Yousuf, Skr.Mohd. Khasim, R/o.Tangadpally Village, Moina bad l\,4andal, Rangareddy Di!;trict. (Dled per LR's 6 to 13)

4. The Joint Collector-ll, Rangareddy District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 5. The Inams Tribunal-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella [)ivision, Rangareddy Dis;trict, at Attapur, Hyderabad. (RR 6 to 13 are brought on record s LR's of deceased Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as per Court Order dated 16-9-2022 in l.A.No.1 ot 2022)

6. Mohammed Na zeemuddin, S/o.Late lVld.Khaja, aged 71 years, Occ . Agriculture, Rio.5-1 17, Ganesh Nagar, Shankarpally, Ranga Re,ddy District 7. Mohammad Zakeer, S/o.Late Md Sheik, Mohaboob, aged 52 years, Occ : Agriculture, Rro.3-6, Tangadapalli Village, Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

8. Mohammad Shaker, S/o.Late tvld.Sheik lVlohaboob, aged 43 years, Occ: Agriculture, No.0-10-431112/H Jalal Baba Nagar, Attpur, Rajender Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

9. Mohd Moulana, S/o.Late Md. Sheik Mohaboob, aged 45 years, Occ : Agriculture, R/o 1 9- 1 -436/A/53/G Bahadurppura, Hyderabad. 'l0.Mohd Azmath. S/o. Late NId. Sheik Mohaboob, aged 33 years, ()cc: Agriculture, R/o 3-6, Tangadapalli Village, Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. i J { 1 l. Ir/ohd Amjath, s/o. Late Md. sheik lvlohaboob, aged 35 years, occ : Agriculture, Rl/o.3-6, Tangadapaili Viilage, Cheveiia Man6at, n'angi neOOy District. 12 Md. Jilani Pasha, Late Mond yousuf, aged 48 years, Occ:pvt. Employee, R/o.5-1 13/1 , GNR Colony, Shankaraili,-Ranga Reddy District.

13.Md. Saleem Pasha, S/o.Late Mohd yousuf, aged 41 years, Occ : pvt. Employee, R/o.5-1 13/1 . GNR Cotony, Shanka-rpalli, danga Reddy District. ...RESPONDENTS 'Petition Under Article 226 o'f 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari declaring the order of 5th respondent in proceedings No. F11229112006 dated 15.04.2010 confirming the order passed by the 4th respondent in File No.L/6235/1991 dated 18.5.2005 as unjust, unsustainable and against the provisions of A P.(T A.) Abo|tion of lnams Act, and consequently quash and set aside the same. l.A.NO:'t OF 2010(WPMP. N O:18243 OF 2010) Petition under section 'l 51 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 order of the 4th respondent in proceedings No.L/6235/199'l dated 18.5.2005 as confirmed by the Sth respondent in File No. F11229112o06 dated 15.O4.2010, pending disposat of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI KRISHNA REDDY PUTTA Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 3 & 6 to 13 : SRI SRINIVAS POLAVARAPU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : Gp FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER / THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No. 145O5 of 2O1O ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. learned counsel for the unofficial respondents and perused 'he entire material on rt:cord.

2. [n the present writ petition, the petitior-rers a_re challenging the orders passed by the respondent No.S in proceedings l{o.Fl I 2291 /2006, dated 15.04.201O confirming the order passed by the respondent No.4 in File No.L/6235 l1()91, dated 18.05.2005 for rejecting the claim of the petition(:rs for granting Occupancy Rights Certrficate in the suit scheclule property, admeasuring to an extent. of Acres 2-35 guntas ir Sy.No.377 and the lald admeasuring Acres 3- O8 guntas in Sy.No.378 situated at Thangadipalll village, Chevella Man dal, Rangareddy District. The clainr of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the purchasers of the suit schedule property through an agreement of saie deed dated 20.4.1960, from the origina_l Inamdars. In vie,uv of the same, the respondent-authorities are rejecting the case of the i 2 petitioners by not granting Occupancy Rights Certihcate in favour of the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the unofhcial respondents basing on counter submits that the respondents have rightly rejected the claim of the writ petitioners on the ground that they have purchased the land from the Inamdars and the same is contrar5r to the orders passed by the Full Bench of this Court in Executiae OlJicer, Group of Temples, Wanaparthg, Mahabubnagar District V. Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar and otherst wherein this Court held that purchaser of land from an Inamdars is not a successor-in-interest and cannot apply for Occupancy Rights Certificate and only a lega1 heir is a successor-in-interest to Inamdar who can continue to occupy the Inam land, can apply to get Occupancy Rights Certihcate. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Full Bench of this Court, the contesting parties have filed Special Leave Petition before Hon'lcle Apex Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court without suspending the orders, granted status-quo with regard to possession of the petitioners therein and the finding given by the Full Bench of this Court apply to the instant cas€., '2023 (l) ALD 83 (TS) (FB) -) 4 submisslon s made bY learned Learned counsel for the petitioners has not disput':d the counsel for the unofficial orders Passed bY the Full responden ts Bench of this Oourt in Executiue Officer's case (supra 1) grant liberty to the petitioners to take and requestecl to after disposal of Special Leave l:'etition r,r'ir,h regard to the approPriate stePs, before the Hon'llle APex Court In vieq' of the submissions made by both sides' this 5. Court has relied on the orders passed by the Full Bcnch of this Court tn Executiae Officer's ccse (supra 1) and the relevant portiotr of the said order is as follows: "58. 1n the light of the above discussion' we answcr the rclerence as u nder: {11 The l:rw laid down in S Veera Reddy's case (supre)' Ls lr:, ;;t;,ti' h""ing ."g"td to the scheme of the 1955. Act we ii," r""* lid do*n in R' Ramender Reddv's .ase ;;;* ;; ftffii' ,t.;;t.."t'"'a overrule the decision in s' veera Reddy c ase (suPra)' t2l We hcld that purchaser of lald from an Inamdar is llot a t,.,t!.e't a''d cannot applv for oRC :,].:;":;;;;- (3) Only a lcgal heir is a successor-in- interest to lnandar who can contlnue to occupy the inam land car-r appiy to get ORC, (4) The decision in Kodithala Keshar'rrlu's case (supra)' does not lav down the correct law and is ovemrled For that a"1i"i"'" of learned Single Judge^s-zurrl the ;:,*rl irtll"i." E"".r.es which have taken contrary view slands overrule,l. l5l Wr: make it cLea'r that an Inamdar' kabiz-e-l adim -o.ot""t"d tegant and non-protected :'l-i:'-.';;*;:r'rr.,t. "i"'ur" intere-st onlv after thev c'btain i##.,-.' ;il; ;;; \ ( ( 4 ORC and cannot create third party rights and/ or interest in any other person before obtaining ORC."

6. The findings given by the Full Bench of this Court squarely apply to the instant case, and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed by foilowing the orders passed in Executioe OfJicer's case (supra 1), as the petitioners are the purchasers of land from the Inamdar and has no right to get Occupancy Rights Certificate. After disposal of Speciai Leave Petition before the Hon'bie Apex Court, if any cause survives in the above case, the petitioners herein are at liberty to agitate for their rights before the appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous appiications, if aly in this petition, shall stand closed SD/. P. PADMANABHA REDDY T REGISTRAR ASS T //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER

1. Two CCs to Gp FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 9nu 99 to SRt KRTSHNA REDDY PUTTA, Advocate IOPUCI 9nu 99 to SRt SRtN|VAS POLAVARAPU, nJro.rie t'dpUCi Two CD Copies To 1 \ 2 J 4 SA GJP s ( tJ o o 1t{ STAJ:€ ( \ 3 0 Jll'i ?ll?', t DE,spn.

11.*c! t'f HIGH COURT DATED:0710112025 ORDER WP.No.14505 of 2010 DISMISSING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. gF40W L i

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments