Partly allowed

Mohammed Munawar Khan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Apr 2022WP/5332/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of two writ petitions challenging revenue proceedings regarding land titles and the refusal to conduct a survey. The High Court dismissed the challenge to the grant of e-pattadar passbooks but directed authorities to conduct a survey and demarcation under Section 151 CPC.

What did the court decide?

W.P. No. 5332 of 2021 dismissed. W.P. No. 13204 of 2021 disposed of with direction to conduct survey and demarcation within six weeks.

Mohammed Munawar Khan Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE SI r',i"i,L'615,3j ffiJif,flf A r HyD ERABAD

¶4

FRIDAY, IHI ,wo iio r.li,,S XIB ?f,! fl i,li,[b

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY WR ITP ETITION No S. 5332 and 13204 of 2021 n: WR ITPETITIo N NO :5 332 OF 202 1

¶7

Betwee n:

¶8

ilfl ffi,siH,i",:x,^,"",Hn*##j*tffi ,H;;k?:,ff ff :i..",",."rff ir:,,i j?

¶9

AND

¶10

...PETIflONER

¶11

iimffifr1ffiffifr#ffil;;:;,,

¶12

ili U:f^l;,*n HI B,it?fli^{h |s Ii: liis,ia f siff :i! i i : rnill,?::}

¶13

o. 5n Rahim Khan. S/o IMohinuddin, ,Aged about 52 years, Occ. Not Known, r;*r, jr, Ro ro o r v" I ru,"'o o i Vi I rli!. s"ai J. n i,a n,s, r r,4a nd a r,

¶14

[f; H,]Hj

¶15

Sri Aziz Khan, S/o. I,4ohinuddin, Aged about "s 48 years, Occ. Not Known, Rio Nizamabad H . N o . 1 2 - 42 t District.1 . A d I o o r ye I I i iet o / vl iir'gll r'0 r", i iui n, g lVl a n d a t, "r.

¶16

¶17

8 Sri Zubela B,qgqr.W/o^..Late IVohitab Khan, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Not. Known, Rio H.No 12__42t1 Adtoor yeitaie;d;vit;;;, s;;;".(;;;.js"r;" It4andal, Nizamabad District.

¶18

Smt. Nafeez Sultana,.Wlo .Aziz Khan, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Not Known, R/o. H.No^'12-4211, Adtoor Yellareddy Viliage, Sa dash iizanusiri nf unOuf ,^- Nizamabad District.

¶19

10.Smt. Mohammed Umair Khan, S/o. Late l,4ohitab Khan, Aged about 30 years, Qcq.^{Not Known, R/o. H_No.12-4211, Adloor yeilareddyViilage,} Sad ashivana ga r Ir,4andal, N izama bad District.

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

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 any order or orders or direction or writ or writs, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring proceedings No.Bl122Sl2O19-51 Daled 2.2.2021 , issued by the 4th respondent is illegal, arbitrary and non

¶22

app\icationo{m\ndandv\o\attonoipr\nc\p\esoinatura\us\tceandset-as\dethe

! I

electronic^Pattadar ondent^{to issueNew} direct^{the 4th resp} 4311,^{an extento{} etitioner^{in SY'No10} same^{and consequently} in^{favour of the P} SY.No' 1043/3,^{and extent} bo^{oks and title deeds} Ac.0-24^Gts Ac.O-26^Gts'Sy.No.1 043/2,^{an extentof} t Ac.1-13^{Gts '} Sy.No 1141^{, an extentof} of Ac.0-03^Gts'' svN o.1044,^{an extento} nt^{of Ac 1-00Gts} tota<sup>admeasuringan No.1047/3'^{an exte} Sadasivanagar and^sy Ac.0-17^Gts situated^{in Adloor YellareddY Village'} extent^{of Ac 4-03 Gts} trict,^{in the interestof iustice and equity'} Mandal,^{KamareddY Dis} IA^N OF 021 ion^{151 CPCPraYingthat} tn the^{circumstances statedin} Petrtion^{under Sect} Court^{may be Pleasedto} ort^{of the Petition ' the High} the^{affidavit filed in suPP} D ated^{2.22021' of the 4th} susPend^{the Proceeding} s^{No.B/122512019-51} in the^{interest of iusticeand} al of^{the abovewrit Petrtion} respondent^{Pending disPos} equitY. r. rr n or\Fl AN REDDY Counsel^{for the Petitioner: SRI' CH' JANARDHANI}

¶27

Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos'1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE} Counsel^{for the Respondent No'5: SRI MOHD' MOINAHMED QUADRI} Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos'6 to 10: NONEAPPEARED}

¶28

3204 0 F 2021 WRIT PETITION^NO:1

¶29

Between:

¶30

o u sewif^e',

¶31

aPfi t3?9:D Yf,U3i*^{JliS[11 x[ii]0s:3't'"'Y'l"o* I;3"'',i',occ,} kr"rii"aov^District.

¶32

...PETITIoNER

¶33

AND

¶34

State of^{Telangana'.rep'by its PrincipalSecretary'Revenue Department'}

¶35

' SeCretariat, HYderabad'

¶36

1. il;'Dl;ir"i^{c6llector'Kamareddv District .,,}

¶37

5 i'Jr,;ira;;,^{s"o,:l'i,[Tii'JIAl"i,'i|:'glt*?.31:{l:'1,-,r"lqr?i::1::li,}

¶38

ili?i1'^i3il",,i,iJii,r.^{.,o.r,4oinuddin ngeo aDout-64years,Occ'Agriculture'} - R/o.H.No.'r- t-ttstz,i'iiaiar,nagir, NeviHousing Boaid Colony, Nizamabad.

¶39

..,RESPONDENTS

¶40

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issue a writ or direction more particurarry one in the nature of Writ of

¶41

¶42

tr/andamus^{declaringthe action of the respondents' particularlythe 4th respondent} herein^{in issuing impugnedmemono Rc No Al /3 1512021daled'2410412021} refusing^{to conductsurvey on the ground of pendencyof one W P No '533212021} filedbytheSthrespondentherein'isillegal'arbitrary'unlust'unconstitutional'and in vtolation^{of principles of nutu"liustice'and alsocontraryto the provisions of} Survey^{and Boundariesn"t' rSZg' and the Rules made thereunder' and} consequently^{direct the 4th respondentto conduct survey and demarcationand fix} boundary^{stones surrounding the lands of the petitioner bearingsy no"1047/38} sy no^{1047/2E admeasuringAc'0-15Gts'} admeasuring^{Ac 0-16 G;} A-t O-Ot^Ot' '^{sy no 1043i2 admeasuring Ac O-22Gts''} sy.no./1043/3 'O'"ut"ing 'u''"oo'oo' sy.n0.1043/1B^{admeasuringAc0-05 Gts' sy no'1043/1A admeasuringAc0-04} Yellareddy^{Village'sadashivnagarMandal'} Gts.,^{all are situated}

¶43

KamareddY^District IA^No: 1 OF²⁰ 21 ircumstances be Pleased^{stated to directin} under^{Section151CPCPraYingthat rn thec}

¶44

Petition the^{High Court may} ix^{boundary stones}

¶45

d in^{support of the Petition'} d emarcation^{and f}

¶46

the^{af{ldavitiile} admeasuring^{Ac 0-} to^{conduct survey'} ring^{sY no 1047i3B}

¶47

the^{4th resPondent} dso^{f the Petitioner bea} sY.no^{/1 043/3 admeasuring} surrounding^{the lan} sY.no^1043/18 Ac.O-22^Gts

¶48

16^{Gts"sY no 104112€admeasuringAc 0-15 Gts} -04^{Gts'' all are} d measuring^{Ac 0}

¶49

Ac.0-03^{Gts''sy.no.1O4312} sY.no^{admeasurrng1043/1A a} KamareddY^District' Ac.0^{-05 Gts} Sadashi^{vnagarlrAandal'} da\ed^2410412021

¶50

admeasuring YellareddY^Village' situated^{at Adloor} mo^{no Rc .No A1/315/2021} ition to^{the impugnedme} pending^{disPosaloi writ Pet}

¶51

without^reierence resPondent^herein'

¶52

rssued^{bY the 4th} HD.^{MOIN AHMED OUADRI}

¶53

HD.^{MOIN AHMED OUADRI}

¶54

Gorrnsel^{for the Petitioner:SRI' MO} to^{4:GP FOR REVENUE} Nos'1 REDDY

¶55

Counsel^{for the Respondent} SRI CH.^JANARDHAN No'5:

¶56

r the^Respondent

¶57

Counsel^fo made^{thef ollowing:coMMON ORDER} the^Court

¶58

-'---'=---'_-

¶59

THE^{HON,BLE SRI JUSTICEA'ABHISHEKREDDY} Nos.^{5332andt32O4of202r} WRITPE^TITION

¶60

co^MMoNoRDER:

¶61

Since^{the issue involvedinboth these writ petitlons} iS intrinsically^{connected with each other' they are taken up together} and disposed^{of by this commonorder'}

¶62

W.P.No.5332of202lisfiledquestioningtheproceedings No.Blt225l2019-51 dated 02.02.2021^{wherebythe Tahsildarhas} held that the Srnt. Ahmadi Begum, respondent No.5^{herein, is the} pattadar and possessor of the lands in Sy.No.1047/38 admeasuring Ac.O-16 guntas, 1047 l2E admeasuring Ac.O-15 guntas, 1043/3 admeasuring Ac.0-03 gunts, 1043/2 admeasurin g Ac.O-22 guntas, 1043/B admeasuring Ac.0-05 guntas, 1043/ 1A admeasuring Ac.004 guntas, totdlly admeasuring Ac. 1-25 guntas, situated at Adloor Yellareddy village of sadashivanagar Mandar (hereinafter referred to as 'subject lands') and therefore respondent No.5 is eligible for new electronic pattadar pass book-cum_title deed in respect of the above said lands

¶63

W.P. No. 13204 of 2O2t is filed by Smt. Ahmedi Begum aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities in issuing impugned memo dated 24.O4.2021 refusing to conduct surt,cr. in rcspect of the subject lands on thc grorrncl ol pcnclencv ol W.P. No.5332 ot 2021.

¶64

¶65

For the sake of^{cortvenience, the parties are hereinafter} relerred to as they are arrayed^{in W.P. No.5332 of 2O2t'}

¶66

The case of the^petitionet ub.,^{MohammedMunawar Khan, in} brief, is that he is the^{owner of the land in surveyNo' 1043/ 1} admeasuring Ac.0-26^{guntas,S.No 1043/2admeasuring Ac'O-24} guntas, S.No. i043/3^{admeasuringAc.O-03 guntas,S'No' 1044} admeasuring Ac.i-13^{guntas, S.No'1141 admcasuringAc'017, totally} admeasuring^{Acs.3-03 guntas situatedat Adloor Yellareddy Village'} Sadashivanagar^{Mandal,Kamareddy District (Old Nizamabad} District) having^{acquired the same through inheritance' Further' in} addition to the^{abovelands, the petitioner has purchasedland} admeasuring^{Ac'1-00insurvey No'1047/3 of Adioor Yellareddy} Village under^{registered sale deed document No 1688/ 1975dated} 06.09.1975.^{It is stated that the name of the petitioner has been} entered^{in the revenue records in respect of the abovesaid lands} totaily^{admeasuring Acs'4-03guntas and he was also issued with} pattadar^{passbookuide pallaNo'6829'It is the further case of the} petitioner^{that for eking out his livelihood'he aiong with his family} members^{went to Saudi Arabiain the year 1991 and returned to} lndia^{in the year 2O05 and started living in Nizamabad'Taking} advantage^{of his absence'Smt'Ahmadi Begum'"::":::,:} herein,^{in collusionwith respondentNo'4'got enteredher namern} the^{revenue records uide proceedingsNo 177/20i5dated}

¶67

¶68

21.O3.2Ot6. Questioning^{the same'petitioner filed an appealin Case} No.As/ 585/^{20 16 beforethe RevenueDivisional Officer' Kamareddy} Division,^{respondentNo'3 herein' However'at the instanceof the} elders and^{on the assuranceof respondent No'S that they haveno} objection^{for mutationof name of the petitioner in the revenue} records, the^{petitioner has withdrawnthe appeal Thereafter' the} petitioner has^{approached respondentNo 4 by u'ay of represenlation} dated 29.05.2020,^{seeking implementationof his name inthe} revenue records as^per the^{terms of settlement entered with} respondent No.s. But, the same was rejected uide^endorsement dated 25.06.2020. Questioning the said endorsement, the petitioner Il1ed W.P. No.10096 of 2O2O and the respondent No.5 filed W.P.No.11868 of 2020. This Court, by way of a common order, dated 10. 1 1.2020, has disposed of both the writ petitions directing respondent No.4 to conduct a thorough enquiry and pass orders on merits. it is further stated that, thereafter the petitioner has approached respondent No.4 by way of a representation dated 01.12.2O2O along with necessar.v documents with a reqLlest to examine the issue. pursuant to the same, respondent No.4 has issued notice dated 1S. t2.2O2O directing appearance of the parties and accordingly petitioner and others have attended the oflice of respondent No.4 on 21.12.2O2O. On that date, respondent No.4 supplied copy of CCLA Ref.No.ASSN.t(1)/46312O2O dated 07.09.2020

¶69

¶70

and inFormed the petitioner that in view of the said proceedings, he cannot proceed with the case further. llowever, after obtaining instructions from respondent No.2, the respondent No.4 without conducting any enquiry has issued the impugned proceedings dated O2.O2,2021 holding that respondent No.S is entitled for e-pattadar passbooks. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner liled W.p. No.5332 of 202t.

¶71

Respondent No.S liled W.P. No. 1320 4 of 2O2l stating that pursuant to the order dated 02.O2.2O2 I passed by respondent No.4, she filed an application dated 20,03.2021 seeking survey and demarcation of the lands in survey Nos.1047, 1043, 1044. However, the Inspector of Survey, District Survey and Land Records, Kamareddy, uide order dated 24.04.2021 refused to conduct survey only on the ground that W.P. No.5332 of^{2O2l is pending before the} Court. Aggrieved by the^{same,W.P. No.13204 of 2O2l is filed'}

¶72

In W.P. No.5332^{ol 2021, on 20'04'2021} '^{this Court directed} the respondents^{not to change the physical features of the land'}

¶73

In W.P^{No.5332 of 2021' respondentNo 5 has filed a counter} affidavit^{mainly contending that the respondentNo'S along with} other^{unofficialrespondentsand other fam y membersare holding} ownership^{and possession over the part of subjectlands by virtue of} family^{settlemententered betweenthem and accordinglytheir names} were mutated^{in the revenuerecords and pattadar passhooksand}

¶74

¶75

title deeds to that effect^{werealso issued. In spite of the same, writ} petitioner has filed an appeal before^{respondent No 3 and after} examining the relevant^{material liled by this respondent rvhen the} respondent No.3 was about^{to dismissthe appeal, the petitioner} herein had withdrawn the appeal and^{accordinglythe appealr,r'as} dismissed on 16.03.2020. The settlement^{outside the Court,as} projected by the writ petitioner, was denied by the^{respondentNo.5.} it is further averred that after the common^{orderdated 1O.11,2O2O} passed by this Court in W.P. Nos. 10096 and 18868 of 2O2O,^the parties have approached the respondent No.4 and after due enquiry the order dated 02,02.202 1 was passed entitling this respondent for getting new electronic pattadar pass book-cum-title deed. Hence, it is prayed to dismiss W.p. No.5332 of 2O2l as devoid of merits.

¶76

Heard Sri Ch. Janardhan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.p. No.5332 of 2O2l , Sri Moin Ahmed euadri, learned counsel for the petitioner in w.p. No.13204 ol 2o2r, and the learned Government pleader for Revenue for the official respondents. Perused the material on record.

¶77

Insofar as W.p No.5332 of 2O2l is concerned, a perusal of the impugned proceedings as weil as the documents filed by the petitioner shows that on an earlier occasion uide proceedings in Amendment No.ROR/247 dated 06.03.2010, the subject lands of the Writ Petition were mutated in favour of the petitioner herein, but the

¶78

¶79

said proceedings w not imp.remented Thereafter, *rr.., ,, i: the revenue records' petitioner found that, lvo'S was entered --" -he name of respondent r the revenue records, before the Revenue has filed an appeai al officer ""'.".rtt of the same. But, for ""tu't^{rectification} ' reasons best known ,oto withdrawn the said the petitioner' he has al on the ground compromised out oI thr that the matter is e court' Thereafter' the apprication before imp^j emen ta ti on or sa j d ::: ", J,":;J:#-J"' ":T; said appiication uas rejected urde endorsement dated 2s.06.2orThe advising the petitioner to approach the civ, ""r.',^{r:"t::.::::T:} gnevance. Thereafter, the petitioner and respondent No.S have approached this Court by way of W.p Nos.10096 and 11868 of2O2O respectively and the same were disposed of by this Court by way of a common order dated lO .l 1 .2020 directing the Tahsildar, Sadashivanagar Mandal, Kamareddy District, to conduct an enquiry and then pass necessary orders. Thereafter, the petitioner has again submitted a representation on 01.12.2020 to the Tahsildar, Sadashivanagar, to conduct enquiry wherein the impugned order dated 02.O2.202 1 was passed.

¶80

A perusal oI the impugned order and the record reveals that the names of the unofficial respondents are entered in the revenue records right from the year rgg2-rgg3. Further, the table shown at

¶81

(

¶82

page^{No 3 of the impugned order reflectsthat in the pahani lor the} year^{1992-93' the narne of the petitioner was shownas pattadarand} enjoyer^{only in respect of survey No'1047/3 that too for an extentof} Ac.0-24^{guntas only and insofar as othersurvey numbersare} concerned,^{the names of other personswere entered in the pattadar} column^Admittedly '^{the petitionerhas been issued e-pattadar pass} book^{and title deed for an extent of Ac 0-24 guntas in respect of} S.No.1047/3A^{onlyand not for other survey numbers' trven though} it is the^{specificcaseof the petitionerthat there was a compromlse} entered^{betu'een the petitioner and the unofficialrespondents'} pending the^{appeal before the Revenue Divisional Offrcer' no} document^{is filed by the petitioner to substantiate the said assertion'} There is^{absolutelynothing on record to sho\' as to what is the} compromise^{entered between the parties and whether unoflicial} respondents^{have accepted the ciaim of the petitioner in respectof} the subject^{lands. Admittedly,once a statutoryappeal is filed by the} petitioner against^{the entries made infavour of the unofficial} respondents^{and the said appealis withdrawn on the ground that he} hassettledthematteroutofCourt,heCannotfileanother application^{seeking rectification of the entries made in favour of the} unofficial respondents.^{Moreover,the recordrevealsthat the names} or the unofficial respondents are entered from the year 1992-1993 onwards. In such a situation, the only remedy available to the

¶83

-<+-.

¶84

¶85

petitioner is to approach the competent Civil Court, if he has any semblance of right, title or interest over the subject 1ands.

¶86

Another important point pertinent to note is that in para 3 of the writ affidavit, the petitioner has stated that he has inherited the subject lands from his ancestors, but along with the writ petition the petitioner himsell has filed an un-registered sale deed dated 05.10. 1976, which shows that the subject lands were purchased by him through a sada saie deed. lf the^{saidsale transaction is true} and is being relied^{on by the petitioner, LLnlessthe petitionerget the} said unregistered^{document regularized underSection5-A of the} Telangana^{Rightsin Landand Pattadar pass Books Act' 1971' he} right over^{the subject lands underthe} cannot^{have anY claim} agreement.

¶87

the fact^{that the entries in the revenue} Having^regardto records^{are there since 1992-93and the petitioner havingsleptover} his^{rights for the last more than three decades' this Court does not} find^{any merit inthe presentWrit Petition warrantingany} interference^'

¶88

Accordingly'^{Writ Petition No 5332 of 2021 is dismissed'} Consequentll^{W P No i3204 of 2O2l is disposed of directing} the^{offrcial respoudcnts to conduct surve)'/ clcmarcation of the land of} pctitione^{r irr W P No I3204 ol2O2l ' il anv application is pending} before^{them, as expeditiousl'v as possibie'preferabll" rvithrn a period}

of six weeks from^{the date of receipt of a copy of this order' If no} such application is^{pending, the petitioner shall submit a fresh} application seeking survey^{and demarcation within a periodol two} weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.^{On such} application being made, the same shall be considered by the authorities within a period of six weeks thereof. It is needless to mention that before undertaking any survey, the authorities shall put the petitioner as well as the neighbouring landowners on notice, and take into account the work memos, if any, filed by any ol the parties.

¶94

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any., shal.l stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶95

//TRUE COPYII
^.1%l^'^iT'#t',SiN'
To .<br>1 SECTION OFFICER
2.
a
o.
4.
5.
6
7
B
ffimHmM:
CHR
w

^.1%l^'^iT'#t',S*iN'

HIGH COURT

DATED:0810412022

COMMON ORDER

1ll.E S]+
o
o 1 3 ltr ,: :!ll n
C5

¶102

W.P.Nos.5332 and^{13204 ot 2021}

¶103

Dismissing the W.P.No.5332^{of 2021 and} Disposing of the W.P.No.13204^{of 2021} Without Costs

¶104

\ A^/ ,' '12--"

Mohammed Munawar Khan v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Munawar Khan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kedermal Vs State of Telangana

G.Raghotham Reddy Vs Sri Suresh Kumar

Sandhya Constructions and Estates Private Limited Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (Ghmc)

Smt.Kamala Kumari Vs Panyala Narsimha Goud

Penna Cement Industries Limited Vs State of Telangana and 6 Others

M/s Sri Venkatasai Enclave Welfare Association Vs The Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company and 4 others