Telangana High Court
Venkat Raghavendra Laxmikanth , ... vs District Registrar, Hyderabad ... on 5 August, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.29482 of 2012
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration
appearing for the respondents. With their consent, this writ
petition is taken up for disposal.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the Registering Authority
has refused to register the subject document on the ground that
the State Government is claiming the subject property as
'Government land' in LGC No.167 of 1997. Aggrieved by the
action of the Registering Authority in not registering the subject
document, the present writ petition is filed.
3. This Court granted interim order on 21.09.2012, directing
the Registering Authority to receive and process the subject
document, subject to the outcome of W.P.No.19106 of 2010 filed
by the State Government against the order passed by Special
Court under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 in LGC
No.167 of 1997.
4. Today, when the matter has been taken up for hearing,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to
the interim order passed by this Court on 21.09.2012, the
Registering Authority have registered the subject document and
further submits that in view of interim order passed by this
Court no further orders are required in this Writ petition.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and
Registration would submit that the subject matter in this writ
petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in
WP No.11653 of 2013, dated 23.07.2024, and the relevant
paragraphs reads as under:
"6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps
and Registration would submit that counter affidavit has
been filed on behalf of respondent No.2 i.e., District Collector,
Hyderabad, and the Paragraph No.8 reads as:
'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 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.'
7. 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 the same, the Mandal Revenue
Officer, Marredpally Mandal, filed WP No.19106 of 2010
before this Court and the Hon'ble Division Bench has heard
and reserved for orders.
8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further
submit that many parties have filed writ petitions on the
similar issue and obtained interim order and thereafter the
respondent authorities have received, registered and
released the documents therein, however fairly submits that
in most of the cases, the respondent authorities have not
filed counter-affidavit and the counter-affidavit filed in this
writ petition may be adopted in all these similar pending writ
petitions, as the issue involved in all the pending writ
petitions is one and the same and pray this Court to dispose
of all the pending writ petitions, granting liberty to all the
concerned parties to seek appropriate remedy, subject to the
outcome of the order which would be pass in WP No.19106 of
2010.
9. Recording the submission made by the learned counsel
on either side and in view of the fact that the subject
document is registered in pursuant to the interim order, this
Court deems it appropriate to disposed of the writ petition
granting liberty to both the parties to seek appropriate
remedy, in accordance with law, subject to the outcome of
the order which would be pass in WP No.19106 of 2010, if so
otherwise aggrieved."
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that
similar order may be passed in this writ petition.
7. Recording the above submission made by learned counsel
on either side and in terms of order passed by this Court in
W.P.No.11653 of 2013 dated 23.07.2024, this writ petition is
disposed of granting liberty to both the parties to seek
appropriate remedy in accordance with law, subject to the
outcome of the order which would be passed in WP No.19106 of
2010, if so otherwise aggrieved.
8. 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.
9. 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
05.08.2024
mrm
