Telangana High Court
Maddeti Sarala Yadav vs The State Of Telangana, on 4 November, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Writ Petition No.30103 of 2024
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed to declare the action
of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in objecting to entertain the sale
deed in respect of the property i.e., all that the part of land
in open plot bearing No.23 admeasuring 70 sq.yds.,
situated at East Maredpally, Secunderabad in Sy.No.74/7
forming part of Dhanalakshmi Cooperative Housing
Society, Secunderabad (subject property) as illegal and
arbitrary and consequently direct respondent Nos.2 and 3
to entertain the document and to give effect registration
over the abovementioned property and release the
document.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
Sri.H.Rakesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the
respondent Nos.1 to 3. With their consent, this writ
petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission
itself.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner No.1 is the owner of the subject property and
petitioner No.2 is intending to purchase the property in
plot bearing No.23 admeasuring 70 sq.yds., situated at
East Maredpally, Secunderabad in Sy.No.74/7 forming
part of Dhanalakshmi Cooperative Housing Society at East
Maredpally from petitioner No.1 who is the owner of the
said property having purchased the same through
registered sale deed No.253/2021 dated 28.01.2021.
Petitioner No.1 also obtained the subject property by way of
filing writ petition in W.P.No.24275 of 2020.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
the petitioners approached the Sub-Registrar, Bowenpally
for execution of the sale deed. 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.
5. 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 in respect of the land in Sy.No.74 at
East Marredpally, Secunderabad and sought to pass
similar order.
6. 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 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 Government
had lost its claim. As such the interest of
Government 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 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.
8. 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, 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.
9. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has not
disputed the same.
10. 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
respondent No.3 to receive, register and release the subject
document. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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
04.11.2024
MRM
