Telangana High Court
Smt.Nivedita, Secunderabad vs Prl Secy, Revenue Department, Hyd And 2 ... on 14 November, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.33287 of 2015
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 09.10.2015, directing the
Registering Authority to receive and process the subject document,
subject to the outcome of WP 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 petitioners submits that in pursuance to the interim
order passed by this Court on 09.10.2015, 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 pass 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 WP 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
14.11.2024
SU
