High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. 2 J.

8. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Telangana State at Hyderabad. The District Collector, Wanaparthy District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Wanaparthy Division, Wanaparthy District. The Tahsildar, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthy District The Sub Registrar, Atmakur, Wanaparthy District. The Station House Officer, Atmakur Police Station, Wanaparthy District. Kurva Anjaneyulu, S/o K. BuchannaAged about 33 years, Occ. Pvt., Employe Rl/o Khanapur Village, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthy District. ...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring inaction of the Respondent No.3 to 6 in deleting the Petitioners' land to an extent of Ac.0-'17gts in Sy No. 107111111 and Ac.0-25gts in Sy No. 1O7111112, total land admeasuring Ac.'l -02gts situated at Khanapur Village, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthy District from the prohibited list is illegal, arbitrary violation of Article 14, 19,21 and 300-4 of constitution of lndia, consequently direct the Respondents No. 3 to 6 to delete the Petitioners' land from the prohibited list thereby set aside the letter Dl. 1711012024 issued by the Respondent No.7 for bond over in respect of above said land lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be, pleased to direct the Respondent No 3 to 6 to delete the petitioner's land to an extent of Ac.0-17gts in Sy No. 1o7l11111 and Ac.0-25gts in Sy No. 1071111t2, total Iand admeasuring Ac.1-02gts situated at Khanapur village, Atmakur Mandal, wanaparthy District from the prohibited list and further direct the Respondent No. () to entertain the registrations in resoect of the non agricultural land Ac.0-2Sgts in {iy No. 1o7t1t1t2 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR ' Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 6: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent no.7: Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.8: SRI RUPENDRA MAHENDERA The Court made the following: ORDER a ORDER: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.35O52 of 2o24 This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is fiied seeking the following relief: " . . . . to issue an appropriate Wi| order or direction, more particatarlg one in the nature of Wit of mandamus declaing the -inaction of the Respondent No.3 to 6 in deleting the P"'titioners' land. to on extent of Ac.O-17 gts in Sg No 107/ 1/ 1/ 1 and Ac.0-25 gts in Sg. No. 1O7/1/1/2, totol land odmeasuring Ac-1-O2 gts situated at Khanapur Vitlage, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthg distict from the prohibited tist is itlegal, arbitrary, uiolation of Article i4, 19, 21 and 300-A of Cottstitution of India, consequently direct the'Respondents No.3 to 6 to de\ete the Petitioners' land from the prohibited tist therebg set aside the letter Dt: 1 7- 1 O 2024 'issued bg the Respondent No.7 for bond ouer in respect of aboue said land...." 2 Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record

3. The petitioner claims to be owner and possessor of lands admeasuring Ac.O-17 gts in Sy.No.107 ll l1' lI and Ac'O-25 gts in Sy.No.1O7/1/ l/2, tolal admeasuring Ac.l-O2 gts. situated at Khanapur Village, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthy District, having acquired the same under registered sale deed bearing document Nos.733 ard 734 12022 dated 30.07.2O2O and since then she is in possession and enjoyment of the same' It is stated that the respondent No.8 who had agricultural land in same Sy.No.107 of 2 1n respect of lald Khaaapur village, with al intention to grab the iand of the petition,:r hled a false suit vide O.S.No.S4 of 2023 on the file of learned Junior Civil Judge, at Atmakur irr resttect of lanri admeasrrr.ing Ac.0-3O gts Sy.No.1O7 l1l2 situated at Khanapur 'Village and obtained interim injunction o:ders against the petitioner and others by misrepresenting th( facts. lt is further stated that when the respondent No.g rnterlt:red with her possessi,on, she frled a suit vide O.S.No.59/2024 cn the file of learnecl Junior Civil Judge, at Atmakur, seekin g perpetual rn;unction 1n admeasuring Ac.O-25 gts in Sy.No. I07/ I l1/2 and, obtained ad. inteim injunctio n vide order dated 15.O7.2O24 passed in I.A.No. lBBl2024. it is th3 case of the petition er ':hat she has obtained NALA proceedings No.24OOi-27795 dated lI.Il.2O24 and got converted the subject land admeasuring Ac.0_25 gts in Sy.No.1OT lll l/2 c:f Khanapur Viilage frorn agriculture use to non-agriculture use. The grievance of the petitioner is that pending adjudicatio n of inter se disputes betvreen her and the respondent No.g, the respondent No.5 has addressed a letter No.B/I2Za/2024 clated 16.11.2024 to the respotrdent No.6 and basing on the same, the respondent No.6 has illegally included the subject lands in the prohibitory 1ist. I L I I 1 I 3

4. Sri A.Suhas Chary, learned counsel representing Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the absence of conducting any enquiry or issuing any notice to the petitioner, the respondents are not having any power or authority to list the subjlct lands of the petitioner in the list of prohibited properties' Therefore, the learned counsel prayed this Court to direct the respondent Nos'3 to 6 to delete the subject lalds of the petitioners from the prohibited list.

5. Per coirtra, the learned counsel for the respondent No'B has submitted that there is a serious dispute with regard to the nature and classification of the lands. It is further 'submitted that when the petitioner encroached the property of the respondent No.8, the respondent No.8 has instituted a suit vide O.S.No.54 of 2023 on the file of learned Junior Civil Judge, at Atmakur and obtained interim injunction order' It is also submitted that basing on the letter dated L6'll'2O24 addressed by the respondent No.5, the respondent No'6 has rightly placed the subject properties in prohibitory list and ultimately prayed to dismiss the writ petition. I 4

6. The learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing tbr the respondent Nos.1 to 6 has submir_ted that sub_ Section (4) of Section 22_A of the Registration .Act, 1,)08 (for short "the Act,,) ccrnfers power on the State Government eil.her suo motu or on arr apolication by any person or for giving elfer:t to the final orders of thr: High Cou rt of Telangana or Supreme C,ourt of India to proceecl to de_noti$r, either in full or in part, th.. notification issued u.nder sub_section (2) and the Rules made under the provision s of the Act. It is further submitted that no notification as requirecl r-rnder Section 22_A ofthe Act is issued in respect of the sub-ie,:t lands. 7 . In vievr of the above submissions, this Cor rrt without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose of the r,r,rit petition reier;ating the petitioner to submit an appropriate application before the Responder t N,t.3 seeking deletion of the subject prolrerty from the list o1- prohibited properties, duJy enclosing ajl relevant lipon submission of such applicat.ion, the Respondenr No.3 shall examine the same and, if it is found that the petitioner fuifils all the requirements, pass appropriate ordersjr*+t66orclaace with the law and communicate the, decision documents .t 5 to the petitioner within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is clarified that deletion of properties from the prohibitory list does not amount to adjudicating the title dispute between the petitioner and Respondent No.8 and if they are having any title dispute, they sha1l agitate the same before the competent Civil Court, in accordance with law.

8. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shatl stand closed. To, //TRUE COPYII SD/- N.SRIHARI UTYREGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER '1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Telangana State at Hyderabad.

3. The District Collector, Wanaparthy District. 4. The Revenue Divisionar officer, wanaparthy Division, wanaparthy District 5. The Tahsildar, Atmakur Mandal, Wanaparthy District 6. The Sub Registrar, Atmakur, Wanaparthy District. 7. The Station House officer, Atmakur porice Station, wanaparthy District. 8. One CC to SRl. RAPOLU BHASKARAdvocate [OpUC] 9. One CC to SRI RUPENDRA MAHENDERA Advocate tOpUCl 10.Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE,High Courtforthe State of Telangana. louTJ

11.Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

12.Two CD Co D T' / HIGH COURT DATED:1 110312025 ORDER WP.No.35052 of 2024 -=-.:=_ lrrE SIqi +J o t' z ]; 2 0 rr,ifl 57E t Oc \RF,\'iC * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS