Zainab Hassan vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1206 Tel

Item No.12

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                  AND
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY


                     WRIT APPEAL No.118 of 2021

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)


1.     The   present     appeal   is    directed   against     an    order

dated 14.12.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing

W.P.No.22245 of 2020 filed by the appellant/writ petitioner wherein,

the prayer made was for issuing directions to the respondents/revenue

authorities to issue the pattadar pass book in her favour in respect of

the land admeasuring Acs.72.00 situated in Survey No.276 of

Puppalguda Village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and

consequently, direct the respondents to implement the letter dated

20.07.2020 issued by the respondent No.2/Collector, Ranga Reddy

District.

2. In the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has recorded

the submission made by learned Assistant Government Pleader for the

Revenue to the effect that the petitioner has not filed any record to

demonstrate that she is the owner and possessor of the subject land.

In fact, an assertion was made by learned Assistant Government

Pleader that the land in question is a Government land, possession

whereof is also with the Government and that the petitioner has no

right, title or interest over the subject land. On examining the records

of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge noted that the

appellant/writ petitioner is claiming to be the owner of the subject

land on the plea that she had acquired the same from her father by

way of an "oral gift". In view of the stand taken by the

respondents/revenue authorities that the subject land is a Government

land and possession thereof is with the Government and noting that

there is a serious dispute with regard to ownership and possession of

the appellant/writ petitioner over the said land, which requires

determination in a competent civil court, the learned Single Judge has

declined to entertain the writ petition and relegated the parties to work

out their remedies before the civil court.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner states that the

appellant/writ petitioner has not approached the learned Single Judge

for issuance of the pattadar pass book, rather she had only requested

that her application be considered by a competent authority.

4. We may note that the relief prayed for in the writ petition is to

the contrary. The appellant/writ petitioner has specifically challenged

the inaction of the respondents/revenue authorities in issuing pattadar

pass book in her favour in respect of the subject land. The submission

made by learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner runs in the

teeth of the prayer made in the writ petition.

5. Having perused the impugned order where, it has been recorded

that there is a dispute with regard to the title and possession of the

subject land, we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge has

rightly declined to entertain the writ petition. We see no reason to

interfere in the said order. It is for the appellant/writ petitioner to file

appropriate proceedings to establish her title in respect of the subject

land and only thereafter, would she be entitled to seek the

consequential relief of issuance of a pattadar pass book in her favour.

6. The appeal is dismissed in limini along with the pending

applications, if any.

_________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 16.04.2021 lur