D. Prasanna Kumari (Deid) Per Lrs 2to4 v. The Collector, Ranga Reddy District,

[ 3302 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT :

t THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH j WRIT PETITION NO: 17816 0F 2011 !

Between:

l

1. D. Prasanna _Kumari (d9i!) per Lrs 2to4, W/o. Late Sri D. Narsa Raju Legal Practitioner (Advocate) Ri"/o. Masab Tank, Hyderabad.

2. D. Sailendra Kumari

3. D.V.S.N. Bhuvanedra Kumar

4. D.V. Gnanendra Kumari (Petitioners 2to4 are brought on record as Lrs of deceased 1st petitioner as per Court Order dated 16-12-15 in WPMP.No.35724l2O1S) ..,..PETITIONERS AND

1. The Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Khairtabad, Hyderabad.

2. The Tahsildar, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ....,RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records connected with the passing of the impugned Order in PRCG.No. B186212009 dated 06-06-2011 by the 2nd respondent herein, in respect of the land in Sy.No.17716 (3 acres 10 gts.) situated at Aziznagar Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and quash the same by issuing a Writof Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction. I.A.NO:1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 21432 OF 201'll Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned Order in PRCG.No. BlB62t2OOg dated 06-

06-201 1 passed b),the 2nd respondent in respect of the land in Sy. No. 1771 6 ot Aziznagar Village Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending final disposal of the main writ petition.

t.A. NO:2 OE 2015(WPMP. NO: 35725 0F 2015) Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to bring the petitioners herein on record as L.R.'s of sole petitioner i.e. smt. D.Prasanna Kumari, as Petitioners No. 2 to 4 in the main W.P.No. 17816 of 2O11' I.A.NO:1 OF 2016flfWMP. NO: 619 OF 2016) Between

1. The Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Khairtabad, Hyderabad.

2. The Tahsildar, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. i ,...,PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND D. Prasanna Kumari, W/o. Late Sri D. Narsa Raju, aged 75 years, Occ : Legal Practitioner (Advocate) R/o. Masab Tank, Hyderabad. ....RESPONDENT/PETTITIONER Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased vacate i the interim orders dt: 29.06.2011, passed in wP.No.17816 of 2011 and dismiss the writ petition.

Counsel for the P,etitioners : SRI J.SURESH BABU Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER

/ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.17816 OF 2O11 ORDER:

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment appearing for the respondents and perused the entire materia,l on record.

Learned Counsel appearing lor the petitioner submits that the schedule property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.3-10 guntas ln Sy.No. 177 16, situated at Aziznagar Village, Moinabad Mandal, Rangareddy District. For the Sy.No.l77 of Aziznagar Village, Moinabad Mandal, this Court passed orders dated i6.12.2022 in W.P.No.B327 of 2OO8 by declaring the lands situated in Sy.No.177 ll to 177 138 ol Aziznagx Village, Moinabad Mandal are patta iands and allowed the said writ petition.

\

SK,J w.P.No.17816 of 2011 3.

The learned Counsel requested to pass similar orders in this writ petition by following the orders passed in W.P.No.8327 of 2008, dated 16.12.2022.

4.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment not disputing the submission made by the learned colrnsel for the petitioner and the orders passed by this Court rn W.P.No.8327 of 2OO8, dated 16.12 '2022' 5.

The sub.iect matter of the writ petition is in Sy.No. 177,r 6 situated in Aziznagar Village, Moinabad Mandal, Rangareddy District and the above said W.P.No.8327 ol 2OO8 is pertaining to the other sub divisions in Sy.Nos. 177. This Court while disposing the writ petition, has called for the records with regard to the Sy.No.177 of Azizrraga:. Village, Moinabad Mandal' Rangarecl<ly District and has given the finding as follows: " 10. At the time of heaing, this Court directed the Lear necl Gouernment Pleader for Assignments to prot)uce the records pertaining to the impugned proceeclittqs ond directed to produce tle assignment

S1(,J W.P.No.17816 of 2O 11 pclttas issued to the landless poor persons in 9y.No.177. The Leamed Gouernment Pleader produced the record.s and the record.s reueal tttnt the Assi,stant Director of S&rlfs, Ranga Reddg District issued a letter in Rc. No.G3/ 2722/ 96, dated 22.11.1996 stated that as per the Classer Akar regi.ster the Su.Nos. j77/ 1 to 3g Potes Patta lands and Pote 39 is poramtrtoke. In the Sethu-tar and Wasool BaEti copies prepared. in the gear 1961, the Sg.Nos.177/ 1 to 39 shoun as patta lands. 1 1. TLe letter of the Mandal Reuenue Offtcer in Lr. No.B/ 318O/ 95, dated 21.O7.1997 addressed to the District Collector tLnt "I lmue udrified the pahanies from the Aear 1954-55 (Kllr-sras) wherein it is recorded that the Surueg Nos.

177/8, 12, 13 and 2O are as Kothakancha patto, except the suruey numbers 177/ 1 & 177/39 uhich are recorded as sarkai porampoke. l These details are carried upto 1981-82 pahani. Ancl all of a sudden tn the year 1982-83 it is recorded as Loani patta against each surueg number (The ertracts are submitted for perusal). The reasons for ttiting as Loani patta are not knoutn. Tlrcre is no reutrd auailable in this ofJice about assignment of this partiatlar land. to ang person, because th.e names of pattadars are appeared in Reuenue Records ight froa 1954-55". But the respondents are unable to produce th,e assignment pattas issued to the landless poor persons.

l \

12. After heaing both sides and. uerifging the original records, this Court is of the considered. uieu that as per

sl('J W.P.No.17816 of 2O11 the tetters of the Assistant Director' S&SLN ' dated 22.11 1996 and the then Ta:ttsild'ar' Moinabad Mon'dal dated- 21.07.1997 clearlg slrllttts that tlere is no record auailable about the assignment of land to the landless poor persons in Sg.No'177 of Azeeznagar Village and the concemed authorities reported thnt the said land is patta land."

The findings of the above said writ petition squarely apply to the instant case as the suit schedule property pertaining to the Sy'No '177 l6 of Aziznagar Village' Moinabad Mandal, RangareddY'

6.

In view of the submissions made by bottr sides' the writ petition is allowed by following the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.S32'7 of 2OO8' dated l6'L2'2O22 arrd also setting aside the impugned orders passed by the respondent No.2 in PRCG'No'B/ 86212OO9' dated 06.06.2011 and consequently, the respondents are directed !

!

to issue title deeds and pass books to the petitioner for the suit schedulc land. There shall be no order as to costs' It \

t'

SIT,J W.P.No.17816 of 2O1 1 ,/ 7.

Misceilaleous petitions, if any, pending shall stand / closed.

{ That Rule Nisi has been absolute as above'

witness the Hon'ble ti;';;i;f J;"ii"" ALoK ARADHE' on this / Tuesday, the Thirty ri"t a""v Jf-o"""'u"i' f*t Thousand and Twenty four' SD/. A.V.S.PRASAD ASSIST T REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// S OFFICER To,

1. The Collector, Ranga Reddy District' Khairtabad'tlyderabad' ; +nI il;ili, trroliaoao Mlndal' Ransa Reddv District'

'r. iiii &$ CP ;oR C;#iiiiliGr'tourttoit'e state orreransana at Hvderabad. [OUTI - 3l:"#;; diiL luaesH BABU' Advocate [oPUCl l^'JIr"f,?^?:'?lo, ., order dated 16'12'2022'in w'P'No'8327 or 2008) SA BSR w

t HIGH COURT DATED:31 11212024

ORDER

WP.No.17816 of 2011 It .(\ IHE si4 \\\ rO )i.

.c) il 1O FEB 2M 'fr':. ".

'.jALLOWING THE W.P WTHOUT COSTS.

gGdd k*

OURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH PETITION No.8327 of 2 ORDER:

This writ p is filed for the following relief an Order, Dtrection or a Wit more porticularlg Wit of Mandamus restraining the req)ondents one irt the the orders passed by the respondent No.2 in from imple 28.02.1999 which was anfirmed tn appeal No.l uide case No. EY 1910/1999 dated D;No.925/ 9 bg the re them as illegal, uoid and consequentlg set

22. t 2.2007, aside the s karned Standing Counsel for the 2.

IF,."o Government Pleader for Assessments ior for the petitioner submitted that the 3.

Ac.3 -23 Guntas in Survey No. 177 /2O, 35 Ac.2.14 Cuntas in S.No.l77 /7 , Ac.l.25 inS 22 Guntas in S.No.177/7, 32 Guntas in S.No ln i It t, l.

t t 1l

832i t11P m varl S particulars of the respective propertres p Ii-o owners with the previous Link documents.

l 4.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner rr ubmi ed before purr,hasing the property, the petition rfea tne ue Records pttrchased the property throuSh e ["r'"

qf the titio er deeds for valuable consideration. All the s+ are the registered documents and no 1bj was r sed by Registering Authority that the lands in quep S 1""*"

No.B While it being so, the respondent No.3 issufl 749 88 T slo of dated 16.09.1995 directing respondent No.4:

tat:

POSS lands in Survey No.177l20, 177 18, 177 /12 n 3at eri titio the Village by r:onducting Panchanama. Again qt the s filed the w.P.No.24627 0f i995 before th1q ds ed ofo di '{ are not assigned lands and the said deed w3s, t.l rhe p the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal un on 28.02.7999. Whereafter' the "r] filed appeal before the respondent No'2 aqd, \\ras e l Fqt'

petlt C ed a ro p e m1 l"

ed T'l*""

respondent No. 1 and filed Writ Petition and on 22.12.20O7. Pending appeal proceedings, t[p tter was efe !

I *,"rT Re dy to Assistant Director of Survey ar-rd [-and S f d.

District on 04.10. 1996 with a direction to c f"t"'"lo I 996 info ed .T The oflicer uide h\s letter No.3/2722/396 dat that "as per the crasser Akar Land -"-'"er year 1358 F 1i i JI {t

sK, I w.P.Nn.E327 oI2003 that the Sun, <i:177 was subdivided into 39 pots and also mentioned in t column in Wasul Baqui Sethwar in Urdu i tha in between Himayatsagar and Aziznagar in Aziznagar Village and that the lands Villages and Ll are rned Counsel submits that respondents are communication of the Mandal Revenue oflicer, Moinaotll';n"."," it has been stated that, "there is no ithis olfice about assignments of this particular .".o.a ,u.it.utJ iili because the names of pattadars appeared in land to "", oJ"Ui Revenue *..o.1 fl s. m" r-""rl"J ght from 1954-55".

,i'C6unset for the petitioner further submitted that failed to appreciate the ratio laid down in the tt " r""po.,a".,tJ Jh.ri l.ili* judgment repo 1996 (4) ALD 572 (DB) Nimmagadda Rama Jr"",o. which held on analysis of the provisions of Devi Vs Districd ilnL, lL,., e there is a condition of non alienation while the Act that onl v assigning the lJr if the l;rnd is assigned is under the provisions of the AP r-""aJntf";. (Ceiting of Agriculture Holdings) Act 1973 it would be ,.",I& iind *ithi., the meaning of the Act, where the assignment ," Llh.t, any such condition as to non alienation it would not o. ""tr$iJe land under the Act and it has no application. 6.

Th" L"^.tJiCounsel ftrr the petitioner turther submitted that here assigned land is allotted under Laoni that even in i()n [lcnch held in 1977 (4) ALD 294 that the Rules of l95O

s(/ .q-l l;

condition with resards to non arienati"" "," iJ,lr. ,,, at o r ed before the sa.id lands can be claimed as assi8r.rgf fanas u er 4.t.

taco rti of T"

fr teoo Therefore it is submitted that it is well establishe non alienability is the criteria under the Act or""f identiff whether a particular land is an asslgn ulel to T["'"

Tr''"""

ot T"

e perusal of the orders of the respondent Nos. I that the important condition of alienability o \ nab itv not even taken note of. Therefore it is submi"r q* efi tn {:

the respondent Nos.l and 2 are based.

i S,3 TO 'ther s conjecture. Learned Counsel for the petit ,erf, bm 'T"o tle Res that before any land is claimed as assigned I ndefts 1$ and to draw such a presumption the respond rlus.t esta istr fne *T'"

teoft date of assignment and the contemporaneotr T r$ under which assignment was made AII , a CS T questions of fact and must frrst be put to the !ff[1'1t'*"'

fflf1,., o"

r to afford him a reasonable opportunity to nd e a land is conce Etl hi possession, and ownership of the :nerl rvIr j valuable property right, in the absence of whi ch i$ e nts .Respon ,t Learned Counsel for the petition.. ."lyjtt r n the 1lo very casual in approach.

judgments of this Court, requested this co ur( alkrw t e i petition.

!

!

i :

i

sKl w.P.No.8327 of2008 Rao and Others Vs. Dpucg Collector q,'r.d. rlq'ftd.q.a and Others reported. in A.P.

u Revcnue 1S"

,1 ii dnd Another Vs. Bakelite Hglam Emplogees Co- .Society, Hgderabdd repoited. i^ 1997 14) ti) operqtfiE ALD 294, ti, M qld A Detri and Others Ys. The Dlsttlct collector, Xrishna 1996 (4) ALT 325 (D-B)'

8.

Learned ment Pleader for the as per the records the Sy.No.177, Assignments s tent ofAc. 162.08 Guntas of Aziznagx Yillage, lht- .i,i{[,,.

li a! pe admeasuring a originally classified as Govt. tand (Kotha Moinabad Man r the entries in the pahanies of the Village Kancha Sarka i!"ora"a as Laoni patta land. The said land was from 1982-83 i divided into 39 S b divisions. Out of which 38 sub divisions were ,i!" ooo, persons, Sy.No.177 /7 admeasuring an .l ,,.

rlntas was assigned to Sri Manjugalla Venkaiah, allotted to the extent'of Ac.3.

Sy.No. 177l8, iAc.s.os Guntas was assigned to Sri Antharam $r, U*,..,, Ac.3.32 Guntas was assigned to Sri Danaiah, Sy.N Gunti Laxmai y.No.l77 l2O, Extent Ac.3.23 Guntas was assigned to S agalk.r Papuiah, Sy.No. 177/21, Extent Ac.3.30 Guntas was d to Sri Mun;agalla Aelaiah. The Gram e Panchayat has ed no oblection certific:rte for construction of the factory in the ,lO "r-., nunrbers and the A.P. Pollution Board | 2olo (4) ALT 655 ': regl 15y elo uea I 1996 (4) ALT 325 (

Ii sK, I t\ P.No 3327 of 2Nt xl t [ti issued a clearance cerdficate for Sy.No'177ri, ft,f and 2O' In this connection it is submitted that the Cram eanclilat is not having any jurisdiction over the Government *":

T jrant of NOC to 1r construct the factory. The Gram Panchavat 1t jiznaSar Vittaee +l i without vertfying the titte of the land issued NOCII l g.

The Learned Government Pleader for signments further As rl i submitted that from 1995 to til1 date the Reven cords show that 1ft the said srtrvey numbers are classified as as lli lands. As per Section 3(2) of the A.P.Assigned Lands, ". "t'itlTr transfer anv assigned land and no person *t mtf oor person shall ire arny assigned land either by purchase gift, lease mortgage ge or otherwise The petitioner herein has purchased the , which is in violation of the provisions of the {PO'I) Act, 1977, the l,earned

10. At the time of hearing, this Court the records !Pirl..

Government Pleader for Assignments to t() orocluce the pertaining to the impugned proceedings and assignmenl pattas issued to the iandless in Sv No.177.

The Learned Government Pleader and the .".o.65 lerreal that the Assistant Director Iianga ReddY ted 22.1 1.1996 District issued a letter in Rc.No.G3/2722lW No 177l I to 38 srated thal as per the classer ekar resister f$t Potes Palta lands and Pote 39 i" p"."tpon:lf he Scthwar and lli !i:

tk ltl I).

tti ili lfllli lr, i!l l'f ,t, fl+

!i SK, I w l' No 1J327 ol2008 * j Wasool Baqui repared in the year 1961 the Sy.No.f77/l to p :I lan 39 shown as pa ds.

1 1.

'The le e Mandal Revenue Officer in Lr.No.B/3180/95 dated 21.07.19 dressed to the District Collector that 'l have from the year 1954 55 {Khasras) wherein it is verified the urvey y.No. 177/8, 12, 13 and 20 are as ii ,t1 recorded that xcept the survey number 177/l & L77/39 Kothakancha e rie which are reco sarkari porampoke. These details are carried s upto 1981-82 I And all of a sudden in the vear 1982-83 it is ii f,{t," .g.,n., each survey number (The extracts recorded as sal)- The reasons for rvriting as Loani patta are are submitted is no record available in this office about not known.

assignment of icuiar iand to any person, because the names red in Revenue Records right from 1954-55".

of pattadars ts are unable to producc the assignment pattas But the respo issued to the poor persons

72. After h ,Jl n "ro.r ancl vcrilying the original records, this Court is of idered view that as per the letters of the IS&SLN, datecl 22.1l.1996 and the then Assistant D andal datecl 2LO7.1997 clearly shows that Tahsildar, M riiivailable aboul l hc assi(nnrent of land to the T there is no re landless poor in Sy.No.177 o[ Azeeznagar Village and the I il concerned au reported th.rt the s;ricl land is patta land i Ii

5K'

w P Na.8321 ol 2008

13. In vi,:u' of the same, the autho basing on the presumptiorrs passed impugned orders and th ue records from e it 1995 cannor be taken into account. This Cofi e and again held the Assignment that there shall be condition of non-alienatipn ni pattas and patta. The -espondents failed to produce the as l ds (POT) Act, the question of proceedings under A.P.Assi11efi 1977 does not arise. The judgement relied by Learned Counsel for thc petitioner apply to the instant case. ; tiit I 3. [n vrew of the same, this Writ Petitign ili1 to be allowed.

Accordingly, allowed. There shall no order as

14. Miscellaneous applications, pending if ap stand closed f1ff CE: K.SARATH Dated:16 12 2022 blt II