Dismissed

syed Anweruddin v. The district Collector

Telangana HC10 Feb 2011WP/20646/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ of mandamus to rectify revenue records declaring his ownership of land. Court held that title disputes are resolvable via civil suit or separate revenue proceedings, precluding mandamus. Writ dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ of mandamus directing the respondents to rectify the revenue records to reflect the petitioner as pattadar and possessor was dismissed. No costs awarded.

syed Anweruddin Vs The district Collector — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY

¶2

W.P.No.20646 of 2002

¶3

Dated: 10-02-2011

Between:

Syed Anweruddin

…Petitioner

AND

The District Collector, R.R.District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad & Others

¶9

Respondents

¶10

This Court made the following:

¶11

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY

¶12

W.P.No.20646 of 2002

¶13

ORDER:

¶14

Petitioner claims to be the owner of the land to an extent of Ac.2.00 in Sy.No.120, situated at Kumarwadi, Shamshabad Village and Mandal, R.R.District. According to him, suddenly, in the year 2000-01 in the pahani, the said survey number was declared as Government land and in possession column, the name of the third respondent was crept in as possessor. Therefore, the petitioner approached the revenue authorities to rectify the revenue records and enter his name as pattadar and possessor over the said land, but as it was no avail, he filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to rectify the revenue records and record the name of the petitioner in possessory column as well as in pattadar column.

¶15

Counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent stating that as per the Sesala Pahani for the year 1955-56 to 1957-58 of Shamshabad village, the land in Sy.No.120, admeasuring Ac.2.31 guntas situated at Shamshabad village is classified as “Inam Dastgardhan” held in the name of Syed Faizullah Khan, son of Syed Mohaboob Ali Shah, resident of Shamshabad, who executed registered sale deed No.383 of 1970, dated 14.5.1970 in favour of Zilla Parishad of Hyderabad constituted under the A.P. Panchayat Samithi and Zilla Parishad Act, 1950 in respect of the land in Sy.No.120 to an extent of Ac.2.15 gts. for a sale consideration of Rs.10,000/-. Since the date of purchase of the land, the Zilla Parishad/Zilla Parishad High School is in possession of the said land, which is evident from the revenue records. The subject-land is in possession of the Zilla Parishad as per the Column No.16 of the pahani from 1981-82 to 2000-2001 and that the petitioner is not the pattadar.

¶16

No reply as such has been filed to the counter affidavit. The docket proceedings also show that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 15.4.2010 and also on 03.6.2010. Even to day, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

¶17

The Government claims that the subject-land was purchased by the third respondent under a registered sale deed whose name has also been recorded in the possessory column as per the sale deed. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the said entries, he can always at liberty to file a suit and can get a declaration against the Zilla Parishad High School and it is incumbent on the authorities to rectify the revenue records as per the decree to be passed by the civil Court in view of Section 9(2) of the Record of Rights Act. That apart, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the said entries, he can also approach the revenue authorities under the A.P. Record of Rights Act seeking rectification of the records, if any. In that view of the matter, no mandamus can be issued for rectification of the revenue records.

¶18

The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

¶19

________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. FEBRUARY 10, 2011 Tsr.

syed Anweruddin v. The district Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

syed Anweruddin v. The district Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kodaraju Ramachandra Rao Vs Gadde Umamaheswara Rao

Neellisetty Sri Lakshmi Vs Tulluri Chit Funds (Pvt) Ltd.

Chintakayala Masenayya, Vs Pajjuri Sriravamma

Gadde Muthu Pullaiah Vs The District Collector

Syed Basha Saheb Vs The Chief Commissioner of Land Admn.

B.Raja Komuraiah Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer