Disposed

Ch.Ravinder v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC17 Aug 2021WP/17504/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ directing removal of land from prohibitory list under Sec. 22 of Registration Act despite Dharani portal showing it as private property. Court directed Collector to verify claim within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed District Collector to examine claim, verify if property is private and erroneously listed, delete from list if applicable, or inform petitioner with documents within six weeks.

Ch.Ravinder Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 17504 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Ch.Ravinder, S/o.Ch Muthyam Aged about 52 years, Occ- Business No- 8-2-220, Bagath Nagar, Karimnagar District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶11

The District Collector, Karimnagar District.

¶12

The Tahsildar, Kothapalli, Karimnagar District.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Karimnagar Division, Karimnagar.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

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 issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more^particularly one in the nature^of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the Respondent No.2^{hereinin puttingthe} land in Sy.No.100/8/2, Ac.O.21^guntas, Sy.No.100/B/1/1 ,^{Ac.0.10 guntas, and} Sy.No.100/C, Ac.0.31^guntas, total admeasuring^Ac.1 .22^guntas, situated^{at algandal} Village, Shivar, Kothapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District, in the^{prohibitorylist of} Sec.22 of Registration Act notwithstanding the^{same land being shown in Dharani} portal, as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14,21 of the Constitution of lndia and also Provision of Registration Act.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High Court may be pleased to delete} the entry in respect of land Sy.No.1 00lBl2,^{Ac.O.21 guntas,Sy.No.100/8/1/1} '^Ac.0.10 guntas, and Sy.No.100/C, Ac.0.31^guntas, total admeasuring^{Ac'1.22guntas,} situated at algandal village, shivar,^{Kothapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District fromthe} Iist of Prohibition immediately^{pending disposal of the abovewrit petition.}

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl.^{V RAGHUNATH}

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents:^{AGP FOR REVENUE}

¶20

The Court made the folloWing: ORDER

¶21

¶22

HONC}URABLE SRI JUSTICP P.NAVEEN RAO

¶23

IVRIT^{PETITION No.175O4} of2O21

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This rvrit l)etition is filed seeking the following relief :

¶26

"..to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particllla{ly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of tlte Respondent No.2 herein in putting the land in S1'.No. 100/B/2, Ac.0.2I guntas, Sy.No.1OO/B/ 1/1, Ac.O. 1O guntas and Sy.No. 100/C, Ac.0.3l guntas total admeasurrng Ac.1.22 guntas situated at Algandal Village Shivar, Kothapalli Mandal. Karimnagar District, in the prohibitory list of Sec.22 of Registration Act notwithstanding the same land being shown in DharanL por-tal, as being illegal, arbitrary and violativJ of Articles 14,^'21 ol the Constitution of India and also provision of Registration Act and pass such other order or orders..,,

¶27

Heard Sri V.Raghunath, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶28

and learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue.

¶29

According to petitioner, he entered into agreement of sale to purchase land to an extent of Ac.0.2l guntas in Sy.No.10O/B/2, Ac.0.10 gunras in Sy.No. tOOlBltlt and Ac.O.31 gunras in Sy.No. 100/C of Algandal Village Shivar, Kothapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District and paid sare consideration and entered into agreement of sale. When petitioner intended to present the deed of conveyance for .registration, he was informed that the subject property is included in the prohibited list of properties and therefore, cannot be processed for registration. As it is a private property and erroneousry, it was included in the list of prohibited properties, the vendor of petitioner, applied through Dharani Web portal to the District Collector requesting him to delete the property from the list of prohibited properties and to notify accordingly, Alleging inaction on the application made, this writ petition is filed.

4,Ex,P.6istheextractofDharaniwebportal'evidencing submisoion^{of aPPlication'}

¶34

That being^{so, withoutexpressing any opinion on merits'the} Writ Petition^{is disposed of, directing the District Collector-2na} respondent^{to examine the claim of the owner of propertydescribed} above and^{on verification,if it is foundthat it is a private property} and erroneously,^{it is inciudedin the list of prohibitedproperties'} steps should^{be taken to delete the propertyfrom the list of} prohibited^{properties On the contrary' the materialavailableon} record discloses^{that the said propertyis not a private propertyor} there is restraint^{imposedfrom dealingwith the property by virtue} of an order^{of Courtor otherwise' the same fact maybe informed to} the petitioner^{and he shall also be supplied all the relevant} documents^{insupport of the decision arrived at by the2nd} respondent.^{The entireexercise shall be completedwithina period} ofsixweeksfromthedateofreceiptofcopyofthisorder.Pending

¶35

miscellaneous^{petitions, if any' shall standclosed'}

¶36

SD/. K.SAILESHI ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// L- l{,

¶37

SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To,

¶39

The Principal^{Secretary, Department of Revenue' State of Telangana'}

¶40

\ Secretariat,^HYderabad

¶41

The District^{Collector, Karimnagar District'}

¶42

The Tahsildar,^{Kothapalli, Karimnagar District'}

¶43

+.tn"n"r"nreDivisionalOfficer,KarimnagarDivision'Karimnagar'

¶44

One CC to^{Sri. V' Raghunath, AdvocateIOPUCI} - 6. i;; CCs^{to GP for. Cerenue, High Court for the State of Telangana[oUT]}

¶45

Two CD CoPies.

¶46

One Spare^CoPY.

PIVI

HIGH COURT

DATEO:1710812021

ORDER

tC
;'<
i:)
25 AuG2021
1'J
'l+ -_.c /
l)Ft p.{

¶53

WP.No.17504 of 2021

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE VJP WITHOUT COSTS.

¶55

@c'qo Ail'r^

Ch.Ravinder v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ch.Ravinder v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adhishankara Infra Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana

C.Parvathamma Vs The State of Telangana

D. Venkateswara Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Akula Narsaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Lankapalli Chinna Vs State of Telangana

M.Sridhar Yadav and another Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others