State Of Telangana And 5 Others vs Sri Ramana Cooperative Housing ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5478 Tel

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                AND
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

            WRIT APPEAL Nos.764 and 765 OF 2019

COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Bhaskar Reddy)


      Heard Mr. P. Radhive Reddy, learned Special

Government Pleader appearing on behalf of learned

Advocate General for appellants; Mr. M.V.S. Suresh

Kumar, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of

Mr.    M.V.Pratap       Kumar      for   respondent       No.1     in

W.A.No.765 of 2019; and Mr. P. Venugopal, learned

Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of

Mr. Ch. Siddhartha Sarma for respondent Nos.1 and 2 in

W.A.No.764 of 2019.

2. Both these writ appeals are preferred by the State

and its officials under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, calling

in question the correctness of the judgment and order

dated 03.06.2019 rendered by the learned Single Judge

in W.P.Nos.39232 and 39825 of 2017. Respondent Nos.1

and 2 in W.A.No.764 of 2019 and respondent No.1 in

W.A.No.765 of 2019 are the writ petitioners concerned

who instituted the aforementioned two writ petitions.

3. Since the contentions are common and also in view

of the fact that both the writ petitions were decided by a

common judgment, it is appropriate that both these

appeals should be disposed of by this common order.

W.A.No.765 of 2019, which arises out of W.P.No.39825 of

2017, is taken up as leading case which will resolve the

issues raised in both the writ appeals.

4. The related writ petition i.e., W.P.No.39825 of 2017

has been filed by respondent No.1 herein i.e., Sri Priya

Plot Owners Welfare Association (registered under the

A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001), questioning the

Gazette Notification No.238-A, Revenue (Registration-I)

Department, dated 22.08.2017, notifying G.O.Ms.No.187,

Revenue (Registration-I) Department dated 22.08.2017,

issued under Section 22-A(1) of the Registration Act,

1908 (for short "the Registration Act") prohibiting

registration of documents relating to immovable

properties situated at Survey Nos.1 to 21 of Kancha

Parvathapur Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Medchal-

Malkajgiri District, to an extent of Acs.362.15 guntas as

illegal, arbitrary and for other reliefs.

5. The writ petitioner society, consisting of its 2000

members, is said to have purchased plots in Survey

Nos.3 to 9 and 12 to 14 in Kancha Parvathapur Village,

total extent of Acs.110.00 under registered sale deeds

executed between 1994 and 2000 and majority of its

members (plot owners) regularised their plots availing

benefits under Layout Regularisation Scheme introduced

by the State Government and also obtained building

permission from the local authorities and constructed

houses in their respective plots. It is the case of the

society that the land purchased by them is a patta land

of Mr. Budram Singh, whose name has been recorded as

pattadar in Sethwar of 1356 Fasli (1946) as well as

Khasra Pahani of 1954-55 and the name of pattadar and

his successors are reflected in the revenue records from

1950-2010. It is their case that the sons of original

pattadar filed a declaration under the provisions of the

A.P.Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act,

1973 (briefly "the Land Ceiling Act", hereinafter) in

C.C.Nos.2058/E/75, 2059/E/75, 2060/E/75, surplus

land was determined by the authorities under the said

Act, the excess land was surrendered and from the

retainable land, the legal heirs of Budram Singh sold

plots to the members of the petitioner society and the

State Government is not having any authority to notify

the patta land under Section 22-A of the Registration Act.

6. Appellants (respondents in the writ petition) filed a

counter affidavit in the writ petition stating that as per

Khasra Pahani of Kancha Parvathapur Village, the land is

recorded as "Salarjang Kancha", one Nawab Syed Ali

Abdul Hassan filed a petition on 27.03.2010 on the file of

District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, claiming as

successor of late Nawab Salarjung Bahadur-III, he is the

defendant in O.S.No.156 of 1980 on the file of VII Senior

Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, suit for partition

of lands instituted by the legal heirs of late Nawab Syed

Abdulla and said suit was decreed vide judgment and

decree dated 12.10.2004 declaring defendant Nos.24 to

43, 47 to 65, 109 and 110 as successors of Nawab Salar

Jung III. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the

contesting parties therein filed an appeal vide A.S.No.222

of 2005 on the file of III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil

Court, Hyderabad, and the same was dismissed

confirming the judgment and decree passed in

O.S.No.156 of 1980. Thus they claimed as owners of the

land purchased by the society.

7. Acting on the representation of the decreeholders in

O.S.No.156 of 1980, the District Collector issued Letter

No.F1/4611/2007 dated 10.05.2012 directing the Sub-

Registrar, not to entertain any registration in respect of

the subject land and also directed the District Panchayat

Officer to ensure that no building permissions are given

over the land in the said survey numbers. The District

Collector vide Letter No.F1/4611/2007 dated 08.05.2013

directed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy

District, to maintain vigil over the land and to protect it

from unauthorised encroachment and also to submit

proposals for notifying the said lands as prohibited

properties under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. It

is the further case of the Government that land in Survey

Nos.1 to 21 of Kancha Parvathapur Village is commonly

called as "Salarjung Kancha" to an extent of Ac.362.15

guntas, as the same was taken over by the Government

as the custodian under the provisions of the Telangana

Area Court of Wards Act, 1350 Fasli (briefly "the Court of

Wards Act", hereinafter).

8. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration

has addressed Letter No.NA1/181/2012 dated

09.02.2016 to the Government relying on the report of

the District Collector in Letter NO.E5/4993/2013 dated

31.08.2015 stating that the property was taken custody

under Sub-Sections (1) to (7) of Section 10 and Section

11 of the Court of Wards Act and the property was prone

to illegal encroachments, it is necessary to protect the

land till a final decision is taken by the Government as

per Section 11 of the Court of Wards Act. The District

Collector vide Letter No.ES/4993/2013 dated 28.07.2016

submitted a report mentioning the nature of the lands

and its classification and expressed his inability to verify

the correlation of the subject lands that if the lands

resumed by the Jagir Administrator and further stated

that he could not verify the records relating to the lands

whether these lands are under the control of Court of

Wards at any point of time. Inspite of the said report, the

Chief Commissioner of Land Administration in letter

No.NA1/181/2012 dated 29.11.2016 has stated as

under:-

"In view of the above, after examination of the report of the Collector, Ranga Reddy District and report of the Tahsildar, Ghatkesar Mandal, it is to inform that, taking into consideration of all the averments made by the Collector, regarding the lands in question, it is came to know that the lands are very valuable lands. And also these lands are recorded as Ceiling Surplus Lands, still court cases are pending on the issue and also the matter is pending before the Court of Wards for release of the property by the legal heirs of the Salar Jung. The land is highly valuable and in prime locations besides the Hyderabad to Warangal high Way which is rapidly developing with Engineering Educational Institutions and small scale industries.(emphasis supplied)"

9. A preliminary Gazette Notification No.109/2013

was issued notifying various extents of lands in Survey

Nos.1 to 21 of Kancha Parvathapur Village, Ghatkesar

Mandal, under Section 22-A of the Registration Act as

prohibited properties. Objections were filed to the said

Notification by M/s. Sri Sai Aiswarya Colony Residents

Welfare Association, M/s. Sree Ramana Co-operative

Housing Society Limited and the petitioner in

W.P.No.39825 of 2017. After appreciation of material

and basing on the reports of the District Collector, Ranga

Reddy District, the Chief Commissioner of Land

Administration issued proceedings No.NA1/181/2012

dated 14.02.2014 stating as under:-

"As per the report of the Collector, Ranga Reddy District, the extent of Ac.362.15 gts., in the reference 4th cited and as per the entries in Khasra Pahani, one Sri Budaram Singh is Pattedar and Possessor. This land was also filed under the Land Ceiling Act as excess land ceiling and determining it was Private Patta land excess land possession was taken over. Hence, as per the records of the Revenue Department, the lands are Patta lands. Meanwhile, in a meeting of the CCLA where the minutes were recorded, it is recorded as the lands of Ac.362.15 gts., were under the control of Court of Wards. There is no specific evidence that has been adduced or referred to, to declare them as lands of Court of Wards. Even if it is lands under Court of Wards, they do not become Government lands and cannot be declared under 22(a). 22(a) declaration which prohibit registrations in the lands is only available for Government lands. Further, there is no

formal communication from CCLA office and the Collector, Ranga Reddy seems to have gone ahead for a Preliminary Declaration under 22(a) based on minutes of a meeting which is not a right procedure to be followed."

10. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration,

after considering the nature of the lands, its classification

and the report of the District Collector has directed to

withdraw the preliminary notification issued under

Section 22-A of the Registration Act and clarifying that

the prohibited notification is valid in respect of land to

the extent of Ac.38.35 guntas in Survey Nos.1, 10, 11 of

Salarjung Kancha. In compliance with the said

directions, the District Collector issued proceedings

No.E5/4993/2013 dated 14.03.2014 withdrawing the

preliminary Gazette Notification dated 08.10.2013

published under Section 22-A of the Registration Act to

the extent of Ac.324.11 guntas in respect of Survey

Nos.1 to 9 and 12 to 21 situated at Kancha Parvathapur

Village.

11. It is the further case of respondents that even

though the preliminary notification was withdrawn but

the same was re-considered again by the Chief

Commissioner of Land Administration basing on the

report of the District Collector dated 31.08.2015 wherein

after referring to the Gazette Notification dated

15.02.1956, it was found that the lands denotified were

classified as "Arazi Maqthas (free assessment lands/rent

free lands)" and this fact was not considered earlier while

denotifying the lands.

12. Learned Single Judge, after considering the rival

submissions and the material on record, has allowed the

writ petitions by declaring G.O.Ms.No.187 dated

22.08.2017 as illegal. Aggrieved by the same, the writ

appeals are filed.

13. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for

the appellants would submit that the land admeasuring

Ac.362.15 guntas in Survey Nos.1 to 21 of Kancha

Parvathapur Village was classified as "Salarjung Kancha";

the said lands were taken control under the provisions of

the Courts of Wards Act as a custodian legacy; originally

this land belonged to one late Nawab Salarjung III and

after his lifetime his legal heirs instituted O.S.No.156 of

1980 on the file of VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court,

Hyderabad, claiming as the successors in interest; the

said suit was decreed after prolonged litigation on

12.10.2004 declaring defendant Nos.24 to 43, 47 to 65,

109 and 110 as successors of late Nawab Salar Jung III;

questioning the said decree and judgment, A.S.No.222 of

2005 has been filed on the file of III Additional Chief

Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, and the same was

dismissed on 01.08.2007 confirming the judgment and

decree passed in O.S.No.156 of 1980; and in fact as per

the report of the District Collector, the said lands were

taken under the custody of the Court of Wards. Learned

counsel would further submit that as per Section 4 of the

Court of Wards Act, the land owners are disqualified for

management or control of the property and the District

Collector has reason to believe that successors of person

who are disqualified under Section 7 of the Court of

Wards Act to manage the properties has invoked the

power under Section 8 of the Court of Wards Act and has

taken possession of the property and the properties are

under control of the Court of Wards. It is further

contended that to protect the property from gullible

people, the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration

has exercised jurisdiction to notify the lands under

Section 22-A of the Registration Act prohibiting from

registration. He would also submit that preliminary

notification issued earlier was withdrawn relying on the

report of the District Collector who reported that records

were not available to correlate the lands resumed by the

Jagir Administrator and the same are under custody of

Court of Wards. He would further submit that the

District Collector vide his report dated 31.08.2015 stated

that the subject lands are classified as "Arazi Maqthas"

notified in the Gazette dated 15.02.1956, since the said

fact was not mentioned in earlier reports, the Chief

Commissioner of Land Administration has issued

proceedings No.NA1/181/2012 dated 29.11.2016

notifying the lands in view of subsequent material, there

is no illegality and prayed to set aside the impugned

order passed by the learned Single Judge.

14. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners, would

submit that objections were submitted by M/s. Sri Sai

Aiswarya Colony Residents Welfare Association on

31.12.2013 and 02.01.2014 to the preliminary Gazette

Notification and based on their objections, the District

Collector has examined the entire records relating to the

subject land and submitted a report in Letter

No.E5/4993/2013 dated 12.02.2014 and basing on the

said report, the Chief Commissioner of Land

Administration & Special Chief Secretary to Government

has issued proceedings No.NA1/181/2012 dated

14.02.2014 inter alia informing the District Collector for

withdrawal of the preliminary notification except land to

an extent of Ac.38.35 guntas in Survey Nos.1, 10, 11 of

Salarjung Kancha notified earlier under Section 22-A of

the Registration Act, the remaining extent of land was de-

notified as patta land and on the very same material

issued the impugned notification, in colourable exercise

of power, non-application of mind and in gross violation

of the principles of natural justice. Learned Senior

Counsel would also contend that the members of the

petitioner society, after purchase of the property, applied

for regularisation of the said plots, and the Government

having considered the title deeds regularised the plots

under Layout Regularisation Scheme and the municipal

authorities have granted building permissions, plot

owners obtained loans from the financial institutions and

with an intention to disturb the settled rights under the

influence of the third parties who are unsuccessful in

recovery of the lands from the members of the petitioner

society and the present notification was once again

issued with an intention to secure the lands from the

custody of the petitioner so as to deliver the same to the

third parties, and as such the action of the Government

is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of rights under Article

14 of the Constitution of India. Learned Senior Counsel

would further submit that the Government is not having

any power to notify the lands by issuing the impugned

notification under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, as

there is no avowed interest of Central or State

Governments.

15. We have carefully considered the submissions made

by learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

16. The District Collector gave a report in Letter

No.E5/4993/2013 dated 12.02.2014 wherein it has been

stated that as per Sethwar of 1356 Fasli (1946), Khasra

Pahani of 1954-55, Mr. Budram Singh is recorded as

pattadar and the land owners also filed declaration under

the provisions of the Land Ceiling Act; the competent

authority while computing the lands, excess lands were

taken possession by the Government; further there is no

evidence that the lands were taken under the control of

Court of Wards; and even if the lands are taken under

the custody of the Court of Wards, the same cannot be

declared or notified under Section 22-A of the

Registration Act prohibiting from registration. Basing on

the said report, the Chief Commissioner of Land

Administration, vide notification No.NA1/181/2012 dated

14.02.2014, withdrew the earlier notification issued

under Section 22-A of the Registration Act except to the

extent of Ac.38.35 guntas in Survey Nos.1, 10, 11 of

Salarjung Kancha and the remaining entire extent of

land was denotified from the preliminary notification.

Surprisingly, the Government acting on the

representation of the third parties who claim to be

successors of late Nawab Salar Jung III once again issued

the impugned notification basing on the very same

material which was the basis for denotifying the lands

vide proceedings 14.02.2014. There is no other material

available on record to state that there was subsequent or

additional information as available which necessitated

the appellants to issue a fresh notification notifying the

subject lands as prohibited properties exercising powers

under Section 22-A of the Registration Act.

17. Further, as per the report of the District Collector,

in Letter No.ES/4993/2013 dated 28.07.2016, it has

been specifically stated that there was no record to state

that these lands are resumed by the Jagir Administrator

or any provisional commutation award was passed or

that these lands are under the control of Court of Wards

at any point of time. Curiously, the Chief Commissioner

of Land Administration even after referring to the above

said report, has issued proceedings No.NA1/181/2012

dated 29.11.2016 stating that basing on the reports of

the Collector, Ranga Reddy District, and Tahsildar,

Ghatkesar Mandal, as the subject lands are valuable

lands recorded as ceiling surplus lands and matter is

pending before the Court of Wards, directed the

authorities to notify the same. This would clearly show

that at the instance of the third parties, who failed to

secure their lands from the possession of the petitioners,

have other way round have instigated the Government to

issue the impugned notification. Further, the appellants

have not placed either before the learned Single Judge or

before us any notification taking possession of the

subject lands under the provisions of the Court of Wards

Act. In the absence of any material, the Government is

estopped from claiming that these lands have been taken

possession under the Court of Wards Act.

18. For the aforementioned reasons, as the appellants

have not filed any material to substantiate their

contentions for re-notifying the subject lands under

Section 22-A of the Registration Act and as the impugned

notification issued under G.O.Ms.No.187 dated

22.08.2017 is bereft of any reasons, we do not find any

justifiable reason to entertain these appeals.

19. The writ appeals are accordingly dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall

stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J

29.10.2022 JSU