Telangana High Court
Smt. Dr. V. Kalpana Kumari vs The State Of Telangana on 7 November, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.24329 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.H.Rakesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4. With their consent, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2. This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents more particularly respondent No.4 in not considering the petitioner representation dated 22.08.2024 pertaining to the property i.e., plot No.271, admeasuring 311.11 sq.yds., in Sy.No.74/6, situated at Balamrai Cooperative Society of East Maredpally, Mahendra Hills, Secunderabad - 500 009 registered vide Doc.No.41/1998 dated 11.01.1988 at SRO Maredpally, Hyderabad for any alienation while considering the same under List of the probation of Registration of Govt. Lands in reference to the Collector, Hyderabad District Lr.No.C3/1712/2024 dated 28.09.2004 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.609 Revenue (Registration-I) Department dated 18.08.2004 the entire land admeasuring Ac.306-15 gts., in Sy.No.74 under Maredpally Paigah is in contradiction to the orders under decree dated 18.03.2010 in LGC 2 No.167/1997 on the file of Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing Probation Act as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the owner and possessor of the plot No.271, admeasuring 311.11 sq.yds., in Sy.No.74/6, situated at Balamrai Cooperative Society of East Maredpally, Mahendra Hills, Secunderabad - 500 009, having registered vide Doc.No.41/1988 dated 11.01.1988 at SRO, Maredpally, Hyderabad. It is further submitted that the petitioner, with an intention to sell the subject property, executed the sale deed dated 31.07.2024 and approached the respondent No.3 for registration. However, respondent No.3 has refused to register the subject document basing on the ground that Sy.No.74 in Cantonment area is under prohibitory list. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that many writ petitions were filed seeking registration of the documents in respect of the lands in Sy.No.74 at East Marredpally, Secunderabad, and this Court had directed the registering authority to receive, register and release the documents presented 3 in respect of the land in Sy.No.74 at East Marredpally, Secunderabad and sought to pass similar order.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration while acceding to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that many number of writ petitions have been filed on similar issue wherein no separate counter affidavits have been filed however, in one of the writ petition i.e., in W.P.No.11653 of 2013, which was disposed of on 23.07.2024 by this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed and the averments mentioned therein may be read/adopted as a counter averments in the present writ petition and has drawn the attention of this Court to the relevant paragraph of the counter affidavit filed in W.P. No.11653 of 2013, which reads as under:
"It is submitted that a comprehensive land case was filed by the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Marredpally against the (7) Societies and as well as some of individual plot owners of Sy.No.74 of Marredpally (Paigah) village in L.G.C, No.167/97 in the Spl.Court under L.G(P) Act, 1982. The Hon'ble Spl.Court, under A.P.L.G.(P) Act dismissed the LGC No.167/97 on 18-03-2010. Aggrieved by the same, the then MRO, Marredpally Mandal filed WP No.19106/2010, before the Hon'ble High Court and the same is pending. The Hon'ble Spl.Court dismissed the LGC on erroneous grounds without properly appreciating the evidence of Govt. and as such writ petition has been filed challenging the 4 same. Thus the LGC judgment has not become final. Further submitted that the litigation between the parties and the Govt. has not reached to its logical end. Under such circumstances it can't be said that Govt. have lost its claim. As such the interest of Govt. still subsists. In view of the above the interest of Govt. that subsists in the subject land will be jeopardized if this W.P. is allowed. Hence it is liable for dismissal."
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that subject matter was earlier adjudicated by the Spl.Court under A.P.L.G.(P) Act, 1982, vide LGC No.167 of 1997, however the said LGC No.167 of 1997 has been dismissed on 18.03.2010. Aggrieved by the same, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Marredpally Mandal, filed WP No.19106 of 2010 before this Court and the same has been heard and reserved by the Hon'ble Division Bench.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that since in similar writ petitions this Court by way of interim order had directed the registering authorities to receive, register the documents presented before them, without reference to the claim of the Government that it is Government land and in pursuance to the said interim direction the documents therein were registered and since the cause in those writ petitions has been served this Court had disposed those writ petitions, granting liberty to all the concerned parties to seek appropriate remedy, 5 subject to outcome of the W.P. No.19106 of 2010, which is pending for orders before the Division Bench of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed this Court to dispose of the writ petition by passing similar order as passed in those writ petitions.
8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has not disputed the same.
9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and recording the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the registering authority to receive, register and release the subject document, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that the registration of the subject document is subject to outcome of the W.P. No.19106 of 2010. It is also made clear that if either of the parties are aggrieved by the orders to be passed in W.P.No.19106 of 2010, liberty is granted to parties to pursue their remedies as available under law.
6
10. It is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confer title on the subject property and it is also made clear that this order would not have any bearing on all those matters where title/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either in revision/appeals for adjudication and in any other case this order also does not preclude the parties in asserting their rights before a competent Court of law.
11. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to cost.
______________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR,J 07.11.2024 mrm