Telangana High Court
E. Samba Shiva Rao vs The State Of Telangana, on 10 February, 2025
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.1007 OF 2025
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking the following
relief:
"...to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the
nature of a writ of certiorari calling for the records with regards to the judgement
and decree passed by Repondent No. 3 in favour of Respondent No. 4 who has
obtained a Decree and Judgement in O.S. No. 599 of 2016 dated 20.11.2023 by
playing fraud before Respondent No. 3 and not disclosing the fact that the said
G.O.Ms. No.1329, Revenue (Wakf) Department dated 03.12.1985, has been
suspended and not disclosing that the subject property was in custody of the Court
of Wards, which was released on the application filed by the Vendors of the
Petitioners by Proceedings vide NA2/49/2004, dated 14.03.2005 issued by CCLA
(Chief Commissioner of Land Administration), and further, a confirmation by
order dated 06.01.2014 vide proceedings No. 5146/JA (1)/2010 issued by Principal
Secretary, Telangana Government as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional besides
it violates the rights of the Petitioner herein under Article 300-A of the
Constitution of India and consequently suspend/quashDecree and Judgement in
O.S No. 599 of 2016, dated 20.11.2023 passed by Respondent No. 3 herein as the
same was obtained by fraud by Respondent No. 4 and pass..."
2. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
respective parties and with their consent, the writ petition is disposed of
at the stage of admission.
3. The case of the petitioners is that they are the absolute owners
and possessors of the land admeasuring 9201 square yards in Survey
No.358/1 and 358/2, situated at Moula Ali, Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy
District (now Medchal-Malkajgiri District) having purchased the same
under registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.1328 of 2017 and
1329 of 2017. It is also the case of the petitioners that since the date of
purchase, they had been in possession and enjoyment of the subject
land. It is stated that originally the vendors of the petitioners were the
absolute owners and possessors of the subject land and their ownership
has been confirmed by the CCLA vide proceedings No.NA2/49/2004
dated 14.03.2005 and the same was confirmed by the Government of
Andhra Pradesh vide R.P. Memo. No.5146/JA(1)/2010 dated 06.01.2014.
It is stated that disputing the nature of the subject land and its
classification and also claiming rights over the said land, a suit was
instituted by respondent No.4 in O.S. No.599 of 2016 before the
Telangana State Waqf Tribunal (for short 'Tribunal') without making
the petitioners as party respondents who are having right and interest
over the subject land, and obtained decree in a fraudulent manner. It is
also stated that respondent No.4 is a party before the CCLA
proceedings and having lost all its rights, and CCLA, after hearing the
contentions of respondent No.4, has rejected the their claims in
R.P. Memo No.5146/JA(1)/2010 dated 06.01.2014. Suppressing the said
fact, respondent No.4 has instituted a suit in O.S. No.599 of 2016 and
obtained decree which is liable to be set aside. It is also stated that the
parties in O.S. No.599 of 2016 also filed revision questioning the orders
passed by the Tribunal and the same is pending before this Court in
C.R.P. No.189 of 2024 and no interim order was passed in the said
revision petition.
4. Pending adjudication of the said revision petition, petitioners
filed this writ petition questioning the same judgment and decree which
is the subject matter of revision petition filed before this Court. If the
petitioners are aggrieved by the fact that respondent No.4 has obtained
judgment and decree from the Tribunal by playing fraud, they have an
alternative efficacious remedy of filing review application in
O.S. No.599 of 2016 before the Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf
Act 1995 or file revision before this Court questioning the said order or
any other appropriate application before concerned authorities.
5. In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose
of the writ petition, granting liberty to the petitioners to file review
before the Tribunal or revision before this Court or any other
appropriate application, questioning the judgment and decree
passed by the Tribunal in O.S. No.599 of 2016 by duly submitting all
the necessary documents.
6. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in
this writ petition stand closed.
_________________________
C. V. BHASKAR REDDY, J
February 10, 2025
RRK/MS
