Allowed

Smt. Koppula Devi Bhavani v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Mar 2023WP/6047/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in W.P. No. 6047 of 2023 directed the registering authorities to accept and register the petitioner's gift deed regarding an open plot. This was based on the Supreme Court's order in Civil Appeal No. 10770 of 2016 which set aside the notification declaring the property as Wakf land.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to receive, register, and release the gift deed within three weeks of presentation, without reference to the Wakf Board or superseded Gazette notifications.

Smt. Koppula Devi Bhavani Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶2

[32s6 |

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO: 6047 OF 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

Smt. Koppula Devi Bhavani, Wo, Sri. K.J. Gopala Krishna Murthy, Occupation. Housewife, Resident of House No.l-2-597 /22 and 221A, Flat No.202, Srisai Nilayam, Baraf Baugh, Lower Tankbond. Hyderabad, Telangana-500029. (Aadhar No. 5596 6001 5394 and Pan No. BMCPDTI S l E

¶7

...PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Telangana, Rep. bl its Principal Segretary, Revenue (Stamps and Regist-ration) Department. Secretariat. Hyderabad.,/

¶10

2 The Inspector /eneral, Sumps and Registration. Govemment of Telangana, Hyderabad. ./

¶11

3 The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad

¶12

The Sub Registrar, Sherlingampally, Rajendra Nagar, R.R. District.

¶13

5 Telangana State Wakf Board, n./ Uy its Chief Executive Officer, Haj House, Razzak Manzii, Nampally, Hyderabad.^/

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of thc Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not accepting the gift settlement deed in respect of the open Plot No.4l (Northern part), in Survey No.202, admeasuring 206 Square yards or equivalent to 172.23 Square meters, Situated at MANIKONDA JAGIR VILLAGE under Manikonda Municipality, Gandipet Mandal^(erstwhile of Rajendra nagar Mandal), Ranga Reddy District, Telangana and bounded. by NORTH . Plot No.40, SOUTH . Part of Plot No.4l, EAST . Part of Ptot No.50,^{WEST. 40'} Wide^Road though the said property is ndt included in the^{prohibitorylist as prepared} U/Sec 22-A of Registration Act 1908 and though the above^propErty is not^part ofany Wakf^property as illegal unlau4ul contrary to law and ponsequently direct^{the 4th respondent} to^acceptthe above document of the petitioner in^tespect of^{the abovepropertyfor the purpose of} registration and release the same^I -

¶16

IA NO: I OF 2023

¶17

Petition under iection 151 CPC praying that in the circurrstan<:es stated in the affidavit fi Ied in surp, rl of the petition, the High Court ma1. be pl:a;ed to direct the 4th respondt nt to 1M re1 ir;ler and release the Gift deed sought to t,: presented by the petition( r in respect (,l the open Plot No.41 (Northern pan), n tiurvey No.202, admeasuring 206 Sqr are yards or equivalent to 172.23 Squar,: 1g131s, Situated at MANIK]NDA JAGI . VTLLAGE under Manikonda Municipality Gandipel Mandal (erstwhilc of Rajcndra rragar Mandal), Ranga Reddy District. Telan,lirna and bounded by NORTI{ . Plot No 40, IOUTII . Part of Plot No.4l, EAST . Part of l,lot No.50. WEST . 40' Wide Road,

¶18

Counsel for the l'etitio rer(s):SRI. ANI RUDH N

¶19

Counsel for the ltespo dcnts I to 4 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶20

Counsel for thc llespo dent 5: SRI. ABU AKRAM, SC

¶21

The Court madc the fc lowing: ORDER

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE MUMMINEI{I SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.6O47 of 2ol23

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Iearned Assistant Government pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for respondent Nos.I to 4 and Sri Abu Akram, learned Standing Counsel, for respondent No.s-Waqf Board.

¶25

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents - registering authorities in not accepting the document presented by the petitioner for registration in respect of open Plot No.4l (Northern part), in Survey No.2O2, admeasuring 206 square yards or equivalent to 172.23 square meters, situated at Manikonda .Jagir Village, under Manikonda Municipality, Gandipet Mandal (erstwhile o[ Rajendra Nagar Mandal), Ranga Reddy District, though the said property is not included in the prohibited properties list prepared undcr Section22-A of the Registration Act, 19Og, as arbitrarv and illegal.

¶26

Thc issue of non-registration of the documents bv thc respondent/ Sub-Regist-rar, ln respect o[ the lands situated in various survey numbers of Manikor-rda .Jagir Villagc, IS

¶27

¶28

considerec by this Court in W.p.No.21952 <)f 2(.27 by taking note of th: order passed by the Hon'ble Apex r.)ourt in Civil Appeal No 1(177O of 2Ot6, daLed 07.O2.2a22, etd a[owed the said writ ,ol-itjon directing the respondents th,:rr:in to receive thc rcturnr cl document and to process the same f : - re gistra[ion, u,ithout re 3rence to the lettcr addressed bv res:ondr:nt - Waqf Board an I the GazeLte Notihcations l.eferro(] to therein. The relevar t portion from the said order reads as li: orvs:

¶29

".1. A perusal o[ the said refusal order j. )\vs that

¶30

basin upon a lettcr said to have addressed by the^,tr)langana Wakf Board bearing letter No.93/ 14(arRR/2(rO (tated 10.12 2C14, the subject land situated in Sun,ey No; 85, 186, 195, !r(r and 194 of Manikonda Jagair Village wer.t ncl-rded in th( prohibiton properties'list. A perusal of the j: id letter datcd O.12.2O11 slroq,s that the subject surve., rrurrbers alorrg rr:h scveral olher survel, numbers of Manik:rLla.Jagrr Villag, *err: declarcd as Wakf properties and notih:,j as such in n.[^(;&:ctte No 6-A datcd O9.O2 1989 and Gaz e tre No.14 datod 36..0.1.2006 It is further evident frorn the s.zrid letter thal. t ( validit].of the said Gazette notihcati()ns is rlri surjcct matte rclorc thc Hontrle Apex Court in 11,: pendrng S.t,.l']. b. 13954 of 2012 and the Hon'ble Apex Court p:.ssed an intcrir ordr:r dated 26.O7.2013, which reads as unde r -

¶31

'ficnceforth any rransaction entered int(, by thl l)etitoncr shall b stb.lcct to thc final adjudication in the pr(sent Srr ral l,eavc DeLrllor It rs also clarrficd that for any transacLion that tt( l,etit oncr inat. h rceforth entcr, the pcndency of lhe abo,..c matrcr an( thc rnterrrr^(rCer thaL \r'as passed by this Court on OB.O5.2Clit shl.ll bc lntrnr?rt <l to hc concerned partv."

¶32

.r. [n thc light o[ the said interim orcler t,irsser] bl, lhc U( r't)lc Apex Court, the Telangana Wakf Board r.cquested

¶33

¶34

the registering authorities to comply with the said order and to communicate the copies of sale deed that are executed in respect of the subject survey numbers to the Wakf Board. In terms of the interim order passed by the Honble Apex Court, any alienations that took place during the pendency of the S-L.P. were directed to be subject to the result of the said S.L.P.

¶35

Now, it is brought to the notice of this Court by Mr.M.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the Hon'ble Apex Court granted leave in the said S.L.p. and consequently, the same was numbered as Civil Appeal No- 10770 ot 201.6. The said S.L.P. came to be disposed of by the Hontrle Apex Court by an order dated O?.O2.2O22 setting aside the above referred Gazette notifications wherein the subject survey numbers were declared as Wakf properties.

¶36

In view of the disposat o[ the above referred S.L.P. i.e. Civil Appeal No. 1077O of 2016 by an order dated O7.O2.2O22, the respondent-Wakf Board cannot b€ said to have any further claim in respect of the subject properties. In the circumstances, there cannot be any impediment for the registering authorities to register in respect of the subject properties on the ground that the subject properties are Wakf properties.'

¶37

In the tight of the above, this Writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents - registering authorities to receive, register and release the document sought to be presented by the petitioner in respect the subject property, without reference to the letter, dated 10. I2.2Ol4 addressed by the respondent _ Waqf Board and the Gazette Notifications vid-e A.p. Gazette No.6-A, dated O9.02.1989 and the Gazette No.l4, dated

¶38

lr,

¶39

¶40

06.0.t.20C r, and completc the same, within a 1;eriod of three

¶41

(3) rveeks lrrrr the date of presentation of the c r>r:unrent by the

¶42

petitioner^'lhere shall be no order as lo costs.

¶43

Mis, c:llaneous Petitions, if any, pendir 1i in this writ

¶44

petition sl aLll stand closed.

¶45

SD/-P.() I. ITA(]ABHUSHAMBA ASI;Ii;TANT REGISTRAR //TIIUE COPY//

)/ .,

SE(]TION OFFICtrR

To,

The l'rirrcipal ieJretar),. Rcvenue (Stamps and Itegistration) :)epatment, Secretariat, Stllc ol Iel:r rrr l. Ilrdcrlhad.

¶50

2 The Inspccto Gencral- Stantps and llegistration. (iovcrnment of Telangana, I Iyderal- ed.

¶51

3.^'lhe I)isrrict R gistr':r. Ranga Rcddy District, HyderabrLd.

¶52

The Sub Rcgis rar. Sherlingampally, Rajendra Nagar, l{.R. I) st r ict 5. The^(lhrcl' E:::rrrivc Officer,^-l'elangana State Wakf lloarl Haj House. Razzak

¶53

Manzil. Namp I Ir.. ll)derabacl.

¶54

6, One^('('ro SII . ,\NI ltiIDFI N. Advocate [OpUC]

¶55

3ne^(l(l ro SR ,\BLJ AKILAN,{, Advocate [OpUi]

¶56

fwo CCs to C⁾ IiOR RIIVIINUE. I{igh Court for lire Stale o -l elangana lourl 9. fwo^(il) Copit ;

HI(;H COUI IT

MSI<,J

DAI[ED:0210 t12023

ORI)ER

WP.No.6047 t f 2023

1 rrE Sf4
o*
1,/(f1 (t
f,
Pz
I 1 7 tt Afl ?023 t1
)>
\ ,.)
.4,
\ *-
i-])As;.j -r" i' -
_{--:.::--;;/'

¶63

WP ]IS DISPC SED OF WITHOUT C OSTS

Smt. Koppula Devi Bhavani v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Koppula Devi Bhavani 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Gel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Secunderabad, and 6 Otrs. Vs the Sub-Registrar, R.R.Dist., and 3 Otrs.

Smt. Noorunnisa Begum Vs The Tahsildar, Asifanagar Mandal, Hyderabad.

Mr. L.P. Sashi Kumar Vs The Govt. of A.P.

Chintala Pullaiah, Vs Mr. Karnan, IAS and 2 others

Chintala Pullaiah , Vs The State of Telangana

Jangili Sattaiah Vs The State of Telangana and 7 others