S.M. Fazululla Shah Quadri And Ano. vs Prl. Secy., Rev. Dept. And 10 Ors.
2025 Latest Caselaw 3878 Tel

Telangana High Court

S.M. Fazululla Shah Quadri And Ano. vs Prl. Secy., Rev. Dept. And 10 Ors. on 13 June, 2025

                             1
                                                          SK,J
                                  W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch



       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

 WRIT PETITION Nos.486, 492, 495, 498, 500 of 2017
               and 10323 of 2018

COMMON ORDER:

All the writ petitions except W.P.No.10323 of 2018

are filed questioning the common order and the suit

schedule property in W.P.No.500 of 2017 and

W.P.No.10323 of 2018 is one and the same. In view of

that, all these writ petitions are heard together and

disposed of by this common order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and learned

counsel for the unofficial respondents.

3. For the purpose of narrating the facts, W.P.No.486

of 2017 is being taken as a lead case.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

Contentions of the petitioners in W.P.No.486, 492,

495, 498 and 500 of 2017

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that

the petitioners have inherited the total land

admeasuring to an extent of Ac.196.20 gts in Sy.Nos.1

to 55 situated at Allapur Village, Balapur Mandal,

Medchal District from their ancestors. The name of Sri

Syed Shah Yahya Alam Quadri was recorded as Inam

Pattadar of the said lands in the village records for the

year 1348 Fasli, Muntaqab No.926, Sethwar, Wasool

Baki and Kasra Pahani for the year, 1954-55. After the

death of Sri Syed Yahya Alam Quadri on 08.10.1964,

his legal heirs filed suit in O.S.No.16 of 1965 on the file

of Munsif Magistrate Court, Hyderabad East and North

for declaration and the same was decreed on

18.03.1965 declaring that Khairunnisa Begum and

seven other persons are legal heirs of late Sri Syed

Shah Yahya Alam Quadri and they are entitled for their

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

respective shares in the land admeasuring to an extent

of Ac.196-20 gts. After the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana

Area) Abolition of Inam Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act,

1955) came into force, the petitioners being legal heirs

of said Sri Syed Shah Yahya Alam Quadri made

applications to the respondent authorities to register

their names as Inamdars under Section 4 of the Act,

1955 and to issue occupancy rights certificate, but no

enquiry was conducted under the said Act and the

Rules.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further

submits that due to grabbing of their lands by the third

parties and the illegal entries in the revenue records,

the petitioners have filed applications vide File

Nos.L/694/2011, L/1383/2011, L/695/2011 and

L/696/2011 in respect of different extents of lands

before the Revenue Divisional Officer to delete the illegal

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

entries in the revenue records and to issue occupancy

rights certificates to them. The said petitions were

dismissed on 27.12.2011 stating that the said lands are

patta lands and the provisions of Inam Abolition Act are

not applicable. Against the said orders, the petitioners

filed appeal Nos.F1/790/2012, F1/2885/2012,

F1/2886/2012, F1/2887/2012 and F1/2833/2016

before the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District and the

same were allowed on 29.03.2014 by setting aside the

orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer and

remanded back the matters to re-examine the

classification of the lands in question which are based

on the Muntaqab No.926/1305 Fasli and directed to

conduct de novo enquiry by giving notices to all the

concerned and pass appropriate orders. After

conducting enquiry, the Revenue Divisional Officer

dismissed the petitions and observed that the

petitioners are not entitled for issuance of Occupancy

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

Rights Certificates as they were not in actual

possession as on crucial date i.e., 01.11.1973. Against

the said orders, the petitioners have filed appeals before

the respondent No.2 vide Appeal Nos.F1/2738/2016,

F1/2831/2016, F1/2739/2016, F1/2740/2016 and

F1/2832/2016 before the Joint Collector-1 Ranga

Reddy District and the same were dismissed by

common order dated 15.09.2016 and held that the

petitioners are not entitled for Occupancy Rights

Certificates and they did not produce any evidence for

having established the possession over the land even

before the lower Court or in the appeal and against the

said orders, the instant writ petitions are filed.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits

that the Inam Tribunal has failed to see that as per the

registered Muntaqab No.926, Sethwar, Wasoolbaki, Kasra

Pahani for the year 1954-55, other number of documents

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

including the letter of the Collector, Hyderabad in out

ward No.A7/11/86/1954 dated 14.04.1995 and office file

No.11/86 of 1954 Atiyat, the subject lands are Inam

Lands and late Sri Syed Shah Ahya Alam Quadri was the

Inamdar and after his death, the petitioners became the

successors. He submits that as per the letter of the

District Registrar vide Lr.No.07/RO(OB)/2014

dated 06.01.2015, no sale transactions took place in

respect of the subject land from 1900 to 1955 i.e., the

crucial date of vesting the inam property in the hands of

the State Government and no protected tenancy

certificate was issued in favour of any third parties. He

further submits that the finding of non-possession is

erroneous as the petitioners were in actual possession

until around 1996 and the revenue records were

destroyed in a fire accident in the year, 1998 and the

authorities have failed to summon or rely on

reconstructed records or secondary evidence.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits

that the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Joint

Collector have not examined the effect of the Decree in

O.S.No.16 of 1965 on the file of Munsif Court, Hyderabad

East and North nor appreciated the legal presumption in

favour of the Inamdar's successor in the absence of rival

claims and the orders are non-speaking, do not assign

cogent reasons and merely reiterate the absence of names

in the pahanis without assessing the legal effect of earlier

records and Court decrees. He further submits that the

land vests in the State only for the limited purpose of

determining the grant of Occupancy Rights Certificates.

Until such determination, the Inamdar or his successor

holds title unless lawfully displaced. He further submits

that mutation of entries is only for fiscal purpose and

does not constitute legal title or lawful possession and

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

requested to allow the writ petitions by setting aside the

common order dated 15.09.2016.

Contentions of the respondent Nos.5 to 7 in

W.P.Nos.492, 495 and 500 of 2017.

8. Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 7

submits that the respondents herein are absolute owners

and possessors of various extents of lands in different

survey numbers situated at Allapur Village, Balanagar

Mandal, Ranga Reddy District having acquired the same

for valuable consideration through registered sale deeds

from the earlier owners, pattadars and possessors of said

lands vide registered sale deeds and they have converted

the said lands from agriculture to non-agriculture and

they are in possession of the same.

9. Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 7

further submits that the petitioners have not filed any

document to show that Mohd. Quasim Ali was the

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

absolute owner of the property admeasuring to an extent

of Ac.196.20 gts in Sy.Nos.1 to 55 situated at Allapur

Village, Balanagar Mandal, presently Medchal District

and no details were given as to how he has become owner

of the property and the source of his title. The alleged

copy of Muntakhab filed by the petitioners does not bear

any stamp or seal of the issuing authority which itself

shows that the said document was created by the

petitioners. The petitioners did not state the date and

month of the gift alleged to have been made by Mohd.

Quasim Ali conveying the property to Syed Shan Yahya

Alam Quadri and not mentioned the nature of gift either

oral or document. The petitioners have not filed Inam

Pattedar Village Records for the year 1348 Fasli,

Muntakab No.926, Sethwar, Vasool Baki and Khasara

pahani for the year 1954-55 and as such it cannot be

said that Syed Shah Yahya Alam Quadri was Inam

Pattedar of the subject land and they have not filed any

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

document to show that they have been in possession of

the property from 1955 onwards till 01.11.1973.

10. Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 7

further submits that the respondent Nos.5 to 7 are not

parties to the suit in O.S.No.16 of 1965 on the file of

Munsiff Magistrate(East and North), Hyderabad, and they

are not bound by the said Judgment and Decree. As per

the settlement records such as Sethwar, Classer Register,

Wasool Baqui etc., and the revenue records such as

pahani patrikas and pahani adangals maintained by the

State under relevant statutes clearly disclose that the

subject lands are patta lands and the Tribunal has no

jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under the provisions

of the Act, 1955 and the petitioners have not placed a

single document that the subject lands are under their

possession and enjoyment from 20.07.1955 to

01.11.1973 and thereon.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

11. Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 7

further submits that in view of the nature of land being a

private patta land, the Government after verification has

mutated the names of the persons who have ownership of

the same. He further submits that as per the pahanies,

the vendors of the respondent Nos.5 to 7 and after

purchase the respondent Nos.5 to 7 are in possession of

the subject land and the petitioners did not challenge the

pahanies for the relevant period. The petitioners were not

in possession of the subject property which is the prime

consideration for grant of Occupancy Rights Certificate

under the Act, 1955. He further submits that the

respondent No.2-Joint Collector after considering all the

documents and the revenue records held that the subject

lands are private patta lands and passed the impugned

order in accordance with the Act, 1955 and the Rules

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

framed thereunder and requested to dismiss the writ

petitions.

Contentions of the petitioners in W.P.No.10323 of

2018.

12. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that

the petitioners are absolute owners and possessors of the

land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.2.20 gts in Sy.No.15

situated at Allapur Village, Balanagar Mandal, Ranga

Reddy District having purchased the same by the

petitoner No.1 through unregistered sale deed

dated 10.05.1973 from one Mrs. Yerram Manikyamma

and after acquisition of rights over the land, the petitoner

No.1 and his family members have made application

under Section 5-A of the Telangana Rights in Land and

Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 to the Revenue Authorities

for regularization of the said unregistered sale deed by

paying requisite stamp duty. After conducting a detailed

enquiry and following due procedure, the competent

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

authority has validated the said unregistered sale deed

dated 10.05.1973 and issued proceedings

No.B/3471/1995 dated 22.09.1995 and thereafter, the

said land was mutated in their favour, title deeds and

pattadar passbooks were also issued to them and their

names were recorded as possessors in the revenue

records. He submits that after partition, the petitioners

were allotted the land to an extent of Ac.2.20 gts and the

respondent No.14 was allotted the land to an extent of

Ac.2.20 gts and the said lands were converted from

agriculture to non-agriculture. The respondent Nos.5 to

12 without having any right or title over the subject lands

have filed application to delete the names of the petitoner

No.1 and his family members and replace their names as

pattadars and possessors of the subject land as per ROR

Act, 1971 and the same was dismissed vide proceedings

No.B/3623/2005 dated 27.01.2009. Aggrieved by the said

orders, the respondent Nos.5 to 12 have filed appeal

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

under ROR Act, 1971 and the same was dismissed in File

No.B/2574/2009 dated 07.01.2012, against which, they

filed a revision under Section 9 of ROR Act, 1971 wherein

the respondent No.2-Joint Collector has set aside the

orders made by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 in favour of

the petitioners and also dismissed the revision filed by the

respondent Nos.5 to 12 as not maintainable.

13. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits

that the subject land was classified as patta land right

from the inception and all the revenue records including

the khasra pahanies of the year 1954-55, all subsequent

ROR records and the pahanies refer to the character of

the land as patta land. The respondent No.13 claiming

through his predecessor made application for grant of

Occupancy Rights Certificate and the same was

dismissed on 27.12.2011 and aggrieved by the same, he

has preferred appeal before the Joint Collector, Ranga

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

Reddy District, who in turn has remanded back the

matter to the Inams Tribunal vide proceedings in File

No.2887/2012 dated 29.03.2014 and the Inams Tribunal

has rejected the claim made by the respondent No.13 vide

order dated 03.05.2016 in File No.L4114/14 and

aggrieved by the same, the respondent No.13 has

preferred appeal before the Joint Collector and the same

was dismissed vide proceedings in File No.F1/2740/2016

dated 15.09.2016. Aggrieved by the said dismissal order,

the respondent No.13 has filed W.P.No.500 of 2017.

14. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits

that the respondent No.2-Joint Collector having held that

the revision petition is not maintainable, but passed the

order setting aside the orders passed by the respondent

Nos.3 and 4 in favour of the petitioners. The respondent

No.2 ought to have seen that the subject land was

classified as patta land right from the inception and the

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

subject land is in exclusive possession of the petitioners

from the year, 1973 and their rights and possession was

confirmed by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 by duly

recording their names in the revenue records and

requested to allow the writ petition by setting aside the

impugned order.

Contentions of the respondent No.13 in W.P.No.10323 of 2018

15. Learned Counsel for the respondent No.13 submits

that the Joint Collector gave a specific finding that the

subject lands admeasuring to an extent of Ac.196-20 gts

0in Sy.Nos.1 to 55 situated at Allapur Village are Makta

lands or Inam lands and one Syed Shah Yahya Alam

Quadri was the Inamdar who died leaving behind the writ

petitioners in W.P.Nos.486, 492, 495, 498, 500 of 2017

and 45935 of 2016 as legal heirs of Inamdar as per the

Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.16 of 1965 on the

file of Munsiff Court, Hyderabad East and North. He

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

further submits that once the subject lands are Inam

lands, the question of provisions of A.P.Pattadar

Passbooks Act are not applicable to mutate the names of

petitioners in W.P.No.10323 of 2018 and without

obtaining occupancy rights certificate, the ROR

proceedings are illegal and void under law and requested

to dismiss the writ petition.

Consideration and findings:

16. After hearing both sides and perusal of the record,

this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners in

W.P.Nos.486, 492, 495, 498 and 500 of 2017 have

questioned the common order passed by the Joint

Collector-I, Ranga Reddy District in the appeals in Case

Nos.F1/2738/2016, F1/2739/2016, F1/2740/2016,

F1/2831/2016, F1/2832/2016 and F/2833/2016 on

15.09.2016 pertaining to various survey numbers with

different extents of lands situated at Allapur Village,

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The said

appeals were filed under Section 24 of the Act, 1955

aggrieved by the orders passed by the Revenue Divisional

Officer, Rajendranagar Division in different orders in File

Nos.L/4113/2014, L/4115/2014, L/4114/2014,

L/4112/2014 dated 03.05.2016, L/1380/2011 and

L/697/2011 dated 10.05.2016 for the land situated in

various survey numbers situated at Allapur Village,

Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners

are claiming the land admeasuring total extent of Ac.196-

20 gts in Sy.Nos.1 to 55 situated at Allapur Village,

Balanagar Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. The

petitioners have filed different applications before the

competent authorities and the same were initially

dismissed by the Revenue Divisional Officer in the year,

2011 and aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have filed

appeals before the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District

and the same were allowed by remanding back the matter

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

to the preliminary authority on 29.03.2014 and

thereafter, the Revenue Divisional Officer has once again

dismissed the said applications on the ground that the

petitioners or their ancestors were not in possession of

the schedule properties as on the date of vesting i.e, on

01.11.1973 as per the report sent by the Deputy Collector

& Tahsildar, Balanagar Mandal and the unofficial

respondents are in possession of the respective schedule

properties as in the capacity of pattadars. The Revenue

Divisional Officer has given a finding that the petitioners

have failed to produce any evidence to show that either

themselves or their predecessors-in-title were in

possession of the lands as on the date of vesting and they

have also failed to produce any evidence to the effect that

they have approached the competent authorities alleging

that the entries of possession recorded in the village

records are incorrect and they are the actual persons in

possession and got any orders to that effect including

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

change in classification of land and rejected the request of

the petitioners for granting Occupancy Rights Certificates.

Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioners have filed

appeals under Section 24 of the Act, 1955 before the

Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District. After hearing both

sides and perusal of the record, the Joint Collector gave a

finding that as per the records available, the petitioners

are not entitled for Occupancy Rights Certificates as

neither themselves nor their alleged ancestor were in

possession of the land as on the date of vesting i.e.,

01.11.1973 and they did not produce any evidence

establishing the possession over the land even before the

lower Courts or in the appeal and gave a finding that the

lower authority has rightly passed the orders under

appeal and there is no reason to interfere with the orders

of the lower Court under appeal and observed that the

nature of land under claim is also changed.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

17. The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently

contended that once the appellate authority has

presumed the subject lands as Inam lands, they have to

allow the appeals filed by the petitioners for grant of

Occupancy Rights Certificates to the legal heirs of the

Inamdars. The contention of the unofficial respondents is

that the petitioners have not filed any document to show

that how the property was conveyed to said Sri Syed Shah

Yahya Alam Quadri. The specific finding of the Inam

Tribunal and the appellate authority is that the

petitioners have failed to file any document to show that

they are in possession as on the date of vesting i.e,

01.11.1973. The petitioners have failed to file any

document before this Court to show that their ancestors

or the petitioners are in possession of the subject

property as on the date of vesting i.e., 01.11.1973.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

18. The relevant portion in Section 4 of the Telangana

Abolition of Inam Act, 1955 is extracted as under;

"4. Registration of inamdars as occupants:-

(1) Every inamdar shall, with effect from the date of vesting, be entitled to be registered as an occupant of all inam lands other than--

(a) lands set apart for the village community, grazing lands; waste lands, forest lands, mines and quarries; tanks, tank beds and irrigation works, streams and rivers;

(b) lands in respect of which any person is entitled to be registered under sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Act;

(c) lands upon which have been erected buildings owned by any person other than the inamdar;

Which immediately before the date of vesting, were under his personal cultivation and which, together with any lands he separately owns and cultivates personally are equal to four and a half times the 'family holding'.

As per above Section, the petitioners or their

ancestors were under personal cultivation immediately

before the date of vesting for granting Occupancy Rights

Certificate (ORC) but, the petitioners have failed to file

any document showing their possession or cultivation of

the subject property on the vesting date i.e, 01.11.1973.

In view of the same, the appellate authority has rightly

rejected the claim of the petitioners for granting

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

Occupancy Rights Certificates and no interference is

called for in the orders passed by the appellate authority

under the Act, 1955.

19. W.P.Nos.500 of 2017 and 10323 of 2018 are

pertaining to the same schedule property i.e., the land

admeasuring to an extent of Ac.5-05 gts in Sy.No.15

situated at Allapur Village, Balanar Mandal. The

W.P.No.500 of 2017 is filed questioning the order in Case

No.F1/2740/2016 dated 15.09.2016 in the appeal under

the Act, 1955. But W.P.No.10323 of 2018 is filed

questioning the order passed by the respondent No.2 in

the revision petition filed under Section 9 of Andhra

Pradesh Rights in Land and Patadar Pass Books Act,

1971 in Case No.D1/5017/2013 dated 28.02.2018. In the

said revision, the respondent Nos.5 to 12 herein have filed

revision before the Joint Collector, Medchal-Malkajgiri

District against the order passed by the Special Grade

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella

Division in File No.C/2574/2009 dated 07.01.2012 in

respect of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.5-05

gts in Sy.No.15 situated at Allapur Village, Balanagar

Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. The respondent

No.13 in W.P.No.10323 of 2018 was impleaded as the

respondent No.5 in the said revision. After hearing both

sides and perusal of the record, the revisional authority

held that the appeal filed by the revision petitioners is not

maintainable and dismissed the revision petition, but at

the same time set aside the order passed by the Deputy

Collector and Tahsildar in File No.B/3623/2005

dated 27.01.2009 and also the order passed by the

Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division in File

No.C/2574/2009 dated 07.01.2012. The respondent

No.2 herein has passed the impugned order stating that

in Inam Abolition Proceedings, the Revenue Divisional

Officer, Rajendranagar Division has passed orders on

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

21.01.2015 in File No.L/1381/2011 in respect of land

bearing Sy.Nos.35 and 49 of Allapur Village on the

application of the petitioner therein for grant of

Occupancy Rights Certificate over the said land and also

in File No.L/1382/2011, the land pertaining to

Sy.Nos.49, 50 and 51 of Allapur Village was declared as

Inam land. In view of the same, the land admeasuring to

an extent of Ac.5.05 gts in Sy.No.15 which is part and

parcel of Sy.Nos.1 to 55 situated at Allapur Village is also

Inam land and as such the ROR Act does not apply to the

said land and the mutation proceedings under the ROR

Act are not maintainable and the consequential orders in

the appeal are non est in the eye of law. While dismissing

the revision petition, the respondent No.2 has set aside

the mutation proceedings issued by the Deputy Collector

and Tahsildar and also the consequential orders in the

appeal in favour of the petitioners.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

20. The petitioners in W.P.No.10323 of 2018 have

rightly contended that the respondent No.2 has

committed grave error in referring to unrelated and

unconnected proceedings to which the writ petitioners are

not the parties for setting aside the orders made in their

favour and the suit schedule property in the instant writ

petition is the subject matter before the appellate

authority in Case No.F1/2740/2016 under the Act, 1955

and the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.5-05 gts in

Sy.No.15 is not declared as Inam land. The revisional

authority under ROR proceedings cannot take into

account of the proceedings pertaining to other survey

numbers in the same village and declared that the land

belongs to Inam land. The said finding of the respondent

No.2 is beyond the scope of the revision filed by the

respondent Nos.5 to 12 and the said findings are contrary

to law and without any basis and without hearing all the

effected parties and the same are liable to be set aside.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

21. The contention of the unofficial respondents in

W.P.No.10323 of 2018 is that without questioning the

findings of the Inam Tribunal in Case No.L/1380/2011

dated 10.05.2016, the petitioner cannot get any benefit

and it has to be declared as Inam land. In fact, the land

admeasuring to an extent of Ac.5.05 gts in Sy.No.15

situated at Allapur village is not declared as Inam land by

the Inam Tribunal or the appellate authority in the above

said proceedings. In view of the same, the contention of

the unofficial respondents is not acceptable and the

finding given by the respondent No.2-Joint Collector in

Case No.D1/5017/2013 dated 28.02.2018 is liable to be

set aside.

22. In view of the above findings, W.P.Nos.486, 492,

495, 498 and 500 of 2017 are dismissed as devoid of

merits.

SK,J W.P.No.486 of 2017 and batch

The W.P.No.10323 of 2018 is allowed by setting

aside the order passed in Case No.D1/5017/2013

dated 28.02.2018 by the respondent No.2-Joint Collector,

Medchal-Malkajgiri District. No order as to costs.

23. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in

these writ petitions, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SARATH, J

Date:13.06.2025 sj