Telangana High Court

M/S. Multidimensions Plot Owners ... vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others on 3 June, 2024

Author: Surepalli Nanda

Bench: Surepalli Nanda

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD


                     W.P.No.9092 OF 2023


Between:

M/s. Multidimensions Plot Owners Welfare Society

                                                    ...     Petitioner

And

The State of Telangana & others

                                                ...     Respondents


JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 03.06.2024


THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA


1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers    :       Yes
   may be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be    :       Yes
   marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to          :       Yes
   see the fair copy of the Judgment?


                                   __________________
                                   SUREPALLI NANDA, J
                                2                                   SN,J
                                                                wp_9092_2023




          THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

                     W.P.No.9092 OF 2023

% 03.06.2024

Between:

# M/s. Multidimensions Plot Owners Welfare Society

                                                     ...   Petitioner

     And

$ The State of Telangana & others


                                                ... Respondents
< Gist:



> Head Note:



! Counsel for the Petitioner        :   Mr.K.Sai Sri Harsha


^ Counsel for Respondents           :   Govt. Pleader for Revenue
                                        for R1
                                        Govt. Pleader for
                                        Assignment for R2 and R3.


? Cases Referred:

          --
                                  3                                        SN,J
                                                                       wp_9092_2023




      THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

                     W.P. No.9092 OF 2023

ORDER:

Heard Mr.K.Sai Sri Harsha, learned counsel appearing

on behalf of the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for

Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and

learned Government Pleader for Assignment appearing on

behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3.

PRAYER:

2. The Petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as

under :

"...declaring the proceedings in File No.F1/3272/6(1)/06 dated 4.2.2006 and the Panchanama Proceedings dated 11.3.2008 under Section 10(6) of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act is contrary to law, illegal, void, violative of Principles of Natural justice and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to set-aside the above proceedings in the interest of justice...".

3. PERUSED THE RECORD :

4 SN,J wp_9092_2023

The counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent, in

particular, paras 7, 8 and 9, read as under:

"7. It is further submitted that, the petitioner society is 3rd party purchaser of the plots in violation of the provisions U/s. 5(3) of the ULC Act. In respect of issuing the orders in the name of the dead person, it is submitted that, it is clearly mentioned in above paras that on enquiry it is found that the land owner expired and whereabouts of legal heirs are not known. Therefore, the proceedings were issued affixed on the existing boulder in the subject site and also on the notice board of Gram Panchayat duly conducting panchanama. In response to the said proceedings neither the legal heirs of pattadars nor the purchasers of the plots including the petitioner society have filed any representation before the then Special Officer, U.L.C., Hyderabad. And further submitted that, the petitioners society is neither the land owner nor legal heir of the land owner but only 3rd party purchaser, as such the petitioner society is not competent to challenge the proceedings issued under the ULC Act.

8. It is further submitted that the petitioner herein stated that the pattadar E.Mallaiah expired in the year 1972 and that the legal heirs of pattadars have executed a registered Power of Attorney in favour of one B.Ravindra S/o late Rangaiah in the year 1988 i.e., after the U.L.C. Act 1976 came into force. The said G.P.A. holder stated to has developed the land into residential plots and sold to various persons who are stated to be members of petitioners Society herein. That sale of any land situated in core area and peripheral area after

5 SN,J wp_9092_2023

commencement of the U.L.C. Act, 1976 is null and void U/s. 5(3) of the Act.

9. In reply to paras 5 to 8, it is respectfully submitted that, the 3rd party purchaser's of the individual plots in Sy.Nos.30 and 31 of Guttalabegumpet Village, Smt P. Sudha Rani W/o. P. Achyutha Ramaiah & (8) others have filed W.P.No.20287 of 2013 and the said writ petition was allowed on 28-04-2014 based on the judgment rendered in W.P.No.22077 of 2009 dated 31-12-2013 wherein the U.L.C. proceedings in file No.F1/3272/6(1)/2006 was set aside. Aggrieved by the above orders of this Hon'ble Court, the Government filed writ appeal in W.A.S.R.No.78377 of 2014 in W.P.No.22077 of 2009. It is further submitted that, Writ Appeal Nos. 275/2018, 276/2018 and 278/2018 have been preferred by certain persons claiming interest in the same land against the orders in W.P.Nos. 20287/2013, 23634/2009, 22077/2009. In this regard it is submitted that the Hon'ble Court in its common orders in W.A.Nos. 275/2018, 276/2018 and 278/2018 dated: 29-03-2022 ordered as "In the considered opinion of this Court, title dispute cannot be decided in writ appeal and therefore, liberty is granted to take recourse to the other civil remedies available under the law. With the aforesaid, the present writ appeals and the leave petitions stand disposed of". Therefore the petitioner society herein is not entitled for any relief as sought for in these paras and the writ petition is not maintainable under law and is liable for dismissal.

6 SN,J wp_9092_2023

4. The case of the Petitioner in brief as per the averments made

in the affidavit filed by the Petitioner in support of the present writ

petition, is as under :

i) The members of the petitioner's society are the owners

of different residential plots in survey No.30 and 31 of Guttala

Begumpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

Originally, the subject land admeasuring Ac.2.13 guntas belonged

to one E.Mallaiah, S/o. Pochaiah, Resident of Madhapur village and

after his demise in and around 1972, his wife and children have

become successors of the subject property through Hindu

Succession Act. In the year 1988, the legal heirs of E.Mallaiah

executed a registered Power of Attorney in favour of Sri B.Ravindra,

in respect of the subject land owned and possessed by them, in

turn B.Ravindra, as a GPA holder, developed the land into

residential plots and sold to different third parties which include

persons who are members in the petitioner's society herein. Since

the date of purchase the members of the society are in possession

and enjoyment of their respective plots.

ii) The Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation Act) has come

into operation w.e.f., 01.04.1976 and the same was repealed and 7 SN,J wp_9092_2023

the Repeal Act came into operation in Andhra Pradesh w.e.f.,

27.03.2008.

iii) Further it is the case of the petitioner that some of the

plot owners of Sy.Nos.30 and 31 of Guttala Begumpet Village have

filed W.P.No.20287 of 2013 in respect of the subject land in

Sy.No.30 and 31, praying for an identical relief, which was allowed

on 28.04.2014 based on the Judgment rendered in W.P.No.22077

of 2009 dated 31.12.2013 wherein the ULC proceedings in File

No.F1/3272/6(1)/06 relating to Survey No.30 and 31 were set

aside. The fact of the above development has not been

communicated by the Urban Land Ceiling office to the concerned

related departments, resulting in the applications being submitted

by the members of the petitioner's society for land regularization.

Whenever the members of the society are approaching the

authorities for building permissions or regularization of plots etc.,

by relying upon the judgment rendered in WP No.22079 of 2009,

the same is being objected stating that the members of the society

are not parties to the said writ petition and the society is not the

petitioner in the said writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, the

petitioner filed the present writ petition.

8 SN,J wp_9092_2023

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION :

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner placing

reliance on the order of this Court dated 31.12.2013 passed in

W.P.No.22077 of 2009 contends that the petitioner herein is also

entitled for the similar relief as obtained by the petitioner in

W.P.No.22077 of 2009. The relevant portion of the order dated

31.12.2013 passed in W.P.No.22077 of 2009 is extracted

hereunder:

"The writ petition, therefore, deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed and there shall be a Mandamus declaring all proceedings taken by the second respondent in File No.F1/3272/6(1)/06 with respect to land of the petitioners forming part of Sy.Nos.30 and 31 of Guttala Begumpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as void, inoperative and ultravires the Act and consequently, the petitioners are entitled to use, enjoy and possess the respective plots purchased by them from out of the aforesaid land in view of the Repeal Act with effect from 27.03.2008. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs."

6. On perusal of the record it is evident that aggrieved against

the orders dated 31.12.2013 passed in W.P.No.22077 of 2009 the

Government filed W.A.S.R.No.78377 of 2014 in W.P.No.22077 of 9 SN,J wp_9092_2023

2009 and the said writ appeal is still pending for final adjudication

before Division Bench of this Court. It is also relevant to note that

Writ Appeal Nos.275 of 2018, 276 of 2018 and 278 of 2018 had

been preferred by certain persons claiming interest in the same

land against the orders in W.P.Nos.20287 of 2013, 23634 of 2009

and 22077 of 2009 and the High Court in its common orders in

W.A.Nos.275 of 2018, 276 of 2018 and 278 of 2018 dated

29.03.2022 observed as under:

"In the considered opinion of this Court, title dispute cannot be decided in writ appeal and therefore, liberty is granted to take recourse to the other civil remedies available under the law. With the aforesaid, the present writ appeals and the leave petitions stand disposed of".

7. This Court taking into consideration the averments

made at paras 7, 8, 9 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf

of respondent No.2 and duly considering the averments

made at para 4 of the affidavit filed by the petitioner in

support of the present writ petition and duly considering the

observations of the Division Bench of this Court dated

29.03.2022 passed in W.A.No.275 of 2018 and batch

referred to and extracted above opines that in view of the 10 SN,J wp_9092_2023

fact that the petitioner's society is a third party purchaser of

the subject plots and as per the Division Bench orders dated

29.03.2022 passed in W.A.No.275 of 2018 and batch, which

had been preferred by certain persons claiming interest in