High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndig praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ of Mandamus, or any other suitable writ, . order, or direction, to- A.Declare that the continued prohibition and reference to CCLA approya-|, as contained in the impugned proceeding No. D1tF1l4676t2O2S dated 29.10.2025, issued by Respondent No.3 {he District Collector,yadadri- Bhongir, are illegal, arbitrary, Honorable, and in contravention of binding Government policy and the judicial pronouncements of this Honorable court in W.P. No. 46133 of 2018, W.P. No. 2730'1 of 2024, and W.p. No. 4036b ot 2022, which have categorically held that such prohibitions are unsustainable once ten years have elapsed without dispute B.Declare that the impugned Proceeding No.D1/F1l4676/2025 daled 29.10.2025, issued by Respondent No.3 the District Collector, Yadadri-Bhongir, is illegal, arbitrary, and colourable insofar as it contains a self-assessed and inflated market valuation of 218,00,000/- per acre, which is contrary to the notified Government market value of 19,00,000/- per acre, and consequently direct the Respondents to rectify and adopt the correct Government guideline value in all related proceedings Direct Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to forthwith delete the Petitioners land from the Prohibited Properties List maintained under Section 22-A ol the Registration Act, 1908, and permit registration of the same in accordance with law D.Direct the Respondents to pay suitable compensation to the Petitioner for the mental agony, harassment, and loss caused due to their deliberate delay, arbitrary conduct, and administrative inaction, despite favourable ground-level reports from the Tahsildar and the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) in 2O13 and 2014. NO:1OF 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 to direct the Respondents, particularly Respondent No. 2 & 3, to forthwith remove the Petitioner's land from the Prohibited Properties List maintained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, and permit registration of the same, without insisting on prior approval or NOC from the COLA, in view of the favourable reports of the Tahsildar and RDO and the binding judicial pronouncements of this Hon'ble Court in.W.P. No. 46133 of 2018, W.P. No. 27301 ot 2024, and W.P. No. 40365 of 2022. Counset for the Petitioner : SRI MOHAMMAD IMTIYAZ PASHA Counsel for the Respondents : SR! L.RAVINDER, AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER o THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VEITUGOPAL This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: "...pleased to issue an appropiate Wrtt of Mandamuq or ang other suitable urit, order, or direction, to- A. Declare that the continued prohibition and reference to CCLA approual, as antained. in the impugned Proceeding No.Dl/FI/4626/2025, dated 29.10.2025, issued by Respondent No.3 -the Distdict Colledor, Yadadi-Bhongir, are illegal, arbitrary, Honorable, and in contrauention of binding Gouernment policg and tlw judicial pronoun@ntents of this Honorable Court in W.P.No.46133 of 2018, W.P.No.27301 of 2024, and W.P.No.4O365 of 2022, which haue categortcaltg leld that such prohibitions are unsustainable one ten years haue elapsed uithout dispute B. Declare that the impugned proceedfuq No.Dl/Fl/4676/2025 dated 29.10.2025, issued bg Respondent No.3 tlrc Di.stict Collector, Yadadi-Blangir, is illegal, arbitrary, and colourable ilwofar as it arntai;s a sefassessed and inflated market uafuation of Rs.18,0O,OOO/- per acre, uhich b contrary to thb notifred Gouernment marlcet ualue of Rs.19,O0,OOO/- per acre, and onsequently direct tlw Respondents to rectifg and adopt tle correct Gouernment guid.ettne ualue in all related proceedings; Page 2 of8 C. Dired Respond.ent Nos. 2 and 3 to forthuith detete ttte Petitioners land from the Prohibited properties List maintained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, and permit registration of the same in accordane utith laut D. Direct the Respondents to pag suitable compensation to the Petitioner for the mental agong, harassment, and. loss caused due to their deliberate delay, arbitrary anduc| and administratiue inaction, despite fauourable grourd.-leuel reports from the Tahsildar and tle Reuenue Diui.sional Olfier (RDO) in 2013 and 2O14 and -E. Pass... "

2. Heard Sri Mohammad lmtiyaz pasha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for the respondents and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the peaceful possessor of land to an extent of Acs.S.O0 guntas in Sy.No.28/3, situated at Hanumapur Village, Bhongir Mandal, yadadri-Bhongir District, which was assigned in the Ex-servicemen quota and his name was also recorded in the revenue records and the revenue authorities issued pattedar passbook uide passbook No.T30O5OO2OL36, dated 2l.O4.2}ta. The petitioner filed o Page 3 of8 w.P.No.2 Lo47 of 2025 before this court seeking deletion of t.l.e subject land from the list of prohibited properties. This court uide its order dated 22.07.2025 disposed of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to submit an online application to the District collector, Yadadri-Bhongir. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted online Application enclosing atl relevant documen ts utde No.25ooo886ss, dated

29.07 .2025 through Bhu-Bharati Portal and requested deletion of the subject land from the list of prohibited properties. Despite the clear judiciat direction, respondent No.3 failed to act upon the application submitted by the petitioner.

4. Aggrieved by the wilful and persistent inaction of respondent No,3, the petitioner was' constrained to file contempt case No.2879 of 2025, which is perrding before this Court for adjudication for non compliance of the order dated 22.07.2025 passed in W.P.No.2 LO4T of 2025. Subsequent to filing of the said contempt case, respondent No.3 issued a pre-dated notice dated 08.10.2025 (received by the petitioner on 1L.1o.2o25), followed by another notice I r I. :l ;,, ;:J Page 4 of8 dated 25.LO.2025 both issued only after contempt proceedings commenced. These actions are colourable exercise of power to create a facade of complaince. The petitioner through his counsel submitted a detailed representation dated 25.LO.2O25 protesting such pot-facto and malafide action. Respondent No.3 issued impugned proceedings No.D1/Fl 1467612025, dated 29.LO.2O25 stating that the proposals have been sent to respondent No.2 -The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration (CCLA) for issuance of an NOC, which is nothing but a mechanical and perfunctory Act.

5. The jurisdiction offered by respondent No.3 that "approval from CCLA is awaited" is wholly untenable in law, as G.O.Ms.No.279, Revenue (Assignment-I) Department, dated O4.O7.2016, e:<pressly dispenses with the requirement of NOC for Ex-servicemen lands after 10 years of assignment where no dispute exists. But in the present case more than 30 years have elapsed since assignment, and a1l filed-leval authorities including the Tahsildar and RDO, have submitted favourable reports. Hence, the continued Page 5 ofE prohibition and repeated reference to CCLA approval are arbitrary, illegal and contra.ry to binding Government Policy and to judicial pronouncements of this Court in W.P.No.46133 of 2018,27301of 2024,40365 of 2022, which have categorically held that such prohibitions unsustainable once ten years have elapsed without dispute. The respondents insistence of adopting an inflated and arbitrary market valuation of Rs. 18,00,000/- per acre in complete disregard of the official guidelines value of Rs.9,00,OOO/- per acre is ex facie illegal, malalide and contrary to the revenue records. Such an inflation valutation has no legal or factual basis, amounts to a colouraboe exercise of power and reflects abuse of administrative discretion. Hence, the present writ petition.

6. Learnid Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that the Govemment issued G.O.Ms.No.279 Revenue (Assn.l) dated 04-07-2016 and the relevant portion is as under: "6. Accordingly, Government after careful examination of the matter, issued the following orders in i Page 6 ofg f supersession of the orders Revenue (Assn.I) Department, da:::u;: ,I (i) The procedure of issui G.O.Ms.No.3OZ 2073:-- with. rhere sharr be no need..i-*HJffiJ:"Ti::::: of assignment of Ex_Serviceme. ""0 Freedom Fighters in which a period of ten years n: ""0 there is no dispute on the rand with the (ii) AII such cases without di prohibitory list under section and rurnished to rhe n.gi"t "l:::#:::::r." of cases in which there ";;:;:o ute shall be deleted from the Act, reo8 tt" about the genuineness (iii) rn with Gov...ror."rect "f ,h.':":r#;: or otherwi". il'ffiT:'::'.';#fj;::*i","1;;:f shall enter the details of such records deteting aII other lands 3::t: ,; Iands in the ontine m which there is no dispute. Z. The Spl. C.S. & Chief Commissioner of Land Administration and the District collectors shall take further necessary action accordingly in the matter., Z. Learned Assistant Government pleader submitted that the case of the petitioner is forwarded to ccLA as per G'o'Ms'N o307 and the petitioner has not demonstrated that he has compried with the order passed by this Court in W.p.No.2 lO4Z of 2025, for fiIing Online further Page 7 of8 Application and the impugned proceedings dated 29.Lo.2o2s has been issued basing on the factual aspect. Hence, the petitioner seeking to set aside impugned proceedings dated

29.Lo.2o25 uide No.DllFl /4676/2o2s does not hold any merit. Hence, seeks to dismiss the present writ petition. f (

8. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusing the material available on record, this court is of the opinion that firstly, the petitioner has not enclosed any online application as directed by this court in w.P.No.2 Lo47 of 2025, dated 22.o2.2o2s. secondly, the impugned proceedings dated 2g.Lo.2o2s uid.e No.DLlFl/4676/2025 has been issued onry on 29.Lo.2o2s, after the contempt case has been filed by the petitioner and the petitioner's prayer to set aside the impugned proceeding does not yielil any result.

9. with the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Page 8 of8 r- As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand dismissed. SD/.P.PONNA KR]SH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRt MOHAMMAD tMTtyAZ PASHA, Advocate. IOPUCI 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. touTl , 3. Two CD Copies. NY BSK BS € I ( HIGH COURT DATED-.12t11t2025 T a? .tv \ s l.l. + ORDER WP.No.34303 of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS b