Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Manne Sharada vs The State Of Telangana
2024 Latest Caselaw 3828 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 3828 Tel
Judgement Date : 18 September, 2024

Telangana High Court

Manne Sharada vs The State Of Telangana on 18 September, 2024

     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

                      WRIT PETITION No.4644 of 2024
ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner 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.

2. This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the

respondents more particularly respondent No.3 while refusing to

register the Relinquishment deed, dated 20.12.2023 presented by the

petitioner in respect of Plot No.202 land admeasuring 600 sq.yds.,

situated in the layout of Dhanalakshmi Cooperative Housing Society,

Mahendra Hills, East Maredpally, Secunderabad Cantonment,

Hyderabad (subject property) as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of

principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of

Registration Act and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 and 3

to receive, register and release the Relinquishment Deed dated

20.12.2023 presented by the petitioner pertaining to the above

property.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is

the owner and possessor of the subject property, having acquired the

same through registered sale deed dated 12.03.1981. It is further

submitted that the petitioner with an intention to relinquish the

property from her mother and brother, has executed a Relinquishment

Deed/Release deed dated 12.03.1981 and approached respondent

No.3 for registration. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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 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."

6. 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.

7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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.

8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the

respondents has not disputed the same.

9. 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 registering authority to receive, register and release the subject

document, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of

three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 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 party is 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.

10. 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.

11. 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 18.09.2024 mrm

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter