Telangana High Court
Thota Devender Reddy vs The Special Officer And Competent ... on 5 March, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.21144 of 2010
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of
the respondents in resorting to ULC proceedings in respect of
the petitioners' property admeasuring Ac.0.08 gts., in
Sy.No.574, Ac.2.09 gts., in Sy.No.575, Ac.4.29 ½ gts., in
Sy.No.580 and Ac.0.15 gts., in Sy.No.581, situated at Alwal
Village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District including the
proceedings of respondent No.2 in G.O.Ms.No.580, dated
04.05.2005 and all consequential proceedings of respondent
No.1 in File No.G1/13089/76 as illegal, arbitrary and for
other appropriate reliefs.
2. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
respective parties and perused the record.
3. It is stated that the petitioners are the owners and
possessors of the agricultural land admeasuring Ac.0.08 gts.,
in Sy.No.574, Ac.2.09 gts., in Sy.No.575, Ac.4.29 ½ gts., in
Sy.No.580 and Ac.0.15 gts., in Sy.No.581, situated at Alwal
Village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and the
revenue authorities have also issued pattadar passbooks and
title deeds in respect of the said lands as per the provisions of
CVBR, J
Wp_21144_2010
the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act,
1971. It is further stated that the subject lands including
other lands were subjected to an enquiry under the
provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition
of Inams Act, 1955 (for short, 'the Act') by the Inams Tribunal
and pursuant to the said enquiry, the Tribunal has granted
ORC in favour of the predecessors of the petitioners vide
Proceedings No.L/553/75. Thereafter, the said property has
devolved upon the legal heirs of the ORC holders and soon
after acquiring the rights of the property, the inamdars have
filed declaration under the provisions of the Urban Land
(Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, 'the Act, 1976')
and the same has attained finality by issuing final orders
under Section 8(4) of the Act, 1976 and consequential
proceedings under Section 10(1), 10(3), 10(5), 10(6) of the
Act, 1976. The grievance of the petitioner is that after
finalization of the proceedings under the Act, 1976,
respondents No.2, exercising powers under Section 34 of the
Act, 1976 has initiated suo motu proceedings to revise the
orders which attained finality under the provisions of the Act,
1976.
CVBR, J
Wp_21144_2010
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently
contended that the respondent-State is not having any power
to suo motu revise the orders which have attained finality
under the provisions of the Act, 1976, more particularly,
when the original authority passed an order, confirmed by
the appellate authority, the revisional authority is not having
any power to re-examine the evidence and the documents
filed in support of the case to come to a different conclusion
for computation of the subject lands.
5. Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioners
fairly submitted that the issues raised in this writ petition
and the validity of G.O.Ms.No.580, dated 04.05.2005, has
already been decided by the learned Single Bench of this
Court in W.P.No.21277 of 2008, dated 05.07.2024, wherein,
the learned Single Judge, relying upon the judgment of the
Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1091 of 2015, dated
07.06.2024, has declared the said GO as illegal.
6. Since the issues raised in this writ petition are squarely
covered and validity or otherwise of the impugned
G.O.Ms.No.580, dated 04.05.2005, has already been decided
by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.21277 of
2008, dated 05.07.2024, this Writ Petition is allowed in terms
CVBR, J
Wp_21144_2010
of the said order. Accordingly, G.O.Ms.No.580, dated
04.05.2005 is set aside insofar as only the petitioners are
concerned. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
________________________________
JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
05.03.2025
Pvt
