Dismissed

Talla Hari Kishan v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Aug 2017WP/27577/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the inclusion of their ancestral land in a prohibited list. The court directed them to approach the Commissioner for Endowment in accordance with a Full Bench judgment regarding Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, and disposed of the writ petition without entertaining further action.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of, directing petitioners to approach the Commissioner for Endowment per Full Bench judgment. No order as to costs.

Talla Hari Kishan Vs State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.27577 OF 2017

¶3

DATED : 18.08.2017

¶4

Between : Talla Hari Kishan S/o.Swamy, Aged 84 yrs, Occu : Agriculture, R/o.2-56, Adibatla, Ranga Reddy District & others.

¶5

.. Petitioners

¶6

And

¶7

State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Lower Tank Bund Road, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

This court made the following :

¶10

¶11

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶12

WRIT PETITION No.27577 OF 2017

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

Heard.

¶15

The limited grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that they are the owners and in possession of land to an extent of Ac.29-11 guntas in Sy.Nos.124, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 331, 350 and 351, situated at Ravirala Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Petitioners claim the same as ancestral properties vested in them by succession. While so, petitioners came to know that the said properties are shown in the prohibited list before the registering authorities. On further enquiries it is shown that the properties are treated as endowed for charitable purpose. Aggrieved thereby petitioners filed representation to the Mandal Revenue Officer, on 10.05.2017 for deletion of the properties from the prohibited list. Alleging inaction on the said representation the present writ petition is filed.

¶16

In substance, the claim of the petitioners is that their properties should be deleted from the prohibited list and they should be permitted to undertake alienation of the said properties. 4. On the issue of registration of documents, inclusion in the prohibited list and the scope of Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 was considered by the Full Bench of this Court and rendered judgment in “ Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary Vs State of

¶17

Andhra Pradesh¹ .”

¶18

In view of the directions of the Full Bench and since the petitioners have to file application before the Commissioner for

¶19

1 2016 (1) ALT (550) (F.B)

¶20

¶21

Endowment requesting for deletion of the properties claimed to have been owned by them from the list of prohibited properties and enclose all the relevant documents, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition and direct the Mandal Revenue Officer to consider the representation stated to have been submitted on 10.05.2017.

¶22

Leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their grievance in accordance with the Full Bench judgment before the Commissioner for Endowment, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶23

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition

¶24

shall stand closed.

¶25

__________________
P.NAVEEN RAO,J
18 th August, 2017
Rds

Talla Hari Kishan v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Talla Hari Kishan v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kantipudi Veerraju, Vs Nagedi Meera Saheb, (died)

Mrs. Pirlamarla Arundathi , Aruna P Gupta, Vs The State of Telangana

Imandi Mallaiah Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Anwar Khan Vs The State of Telegana

Bonthu Vijayalakshmi , Beela Manga Satya Kanakadurga Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Naseema Begum, W/o Md.Ehateshamul Huq, D/o. Mohammad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal