Kalluri Jayarami Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Kalluri Javarami^{Reddy, sio. K. Murthy Reddy,. Aged 59 vears' occ Business'} R/o.12-13-583/18.^{Tirumata'"Ardro",'-ili6rrriundttalar'Tarriaka, secunderabad-} 500 017.

¶10

...PET!TIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telangana,^{Rep.by its Principle Secretary' Revenue} Department,^{Secreiariat Buildings'HyderaDao}

¶13

2 The Commissioner^{and lnspector General of Registrarion and Stamps'} Telangana^{State, Hyderabad.}

¶14

J The District^{Collector, Madchal Malkajgiri Dist} '

¶15

4 The District^{Registrar, Madchal - Malkajgiri Dist '}

¶16

E Jhe^{Sub-Registrar, Narapally, Medchal Malkajgiri Dist.'}

¶17

6 The Assistant^{commissioner,EndoWmentsDepartment, Secunderabad}

¶18

..RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under^{Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances^{statedin the affidavit filed therewith' the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue^{order or orders, directionor directions' writ or ryrits particularly} one in the^{nature Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents} particularly respondent^{NoS in not registeringthe sale deed in respect of Plot} No.43 D in^{Part of Survey No 33/10 and 33/11 admeasuring 381 square yardsor} 318.51^{Sq. Meters, in Aravinda Colony'in Sanctionedlay out Proceedings} No.73168,^{dtd.07-04.68 by the Grampanchayat,Boduppalsituatedat} Chenigicherla^{Village, Boduppal Muncipal Corporation'Medipalli Mandal'} Madchal Malkajgiri^{Dist.,which is not included in the prohibitory liSt aS prepared}

¶20

Y

¶21

uls.22 A(2)( c ) of ftegistration Act., as illegat, un lawfull, contr€rry and against the provisions of Registration and stamp Act., and consequenUy direct the Sth respondent to accept and register the same in respect of the above property release the sale deed.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶23

Petition under Section i 5i cpc praying that in the circumst:rnces stated in the affidavit filed in r;r-rpport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.5 herein receive and register the sale D:ed presente( by the petitioner irr respect of plot No.43 D in part of Survey No 3lr/10 and 33111 admeasuring 38l squ,are yards or 3'r8.51 sq. Meters., in Aravinda corony, ir1 sanctioned lay out P,"oceedings No.73169, dtd.07-04-68 by the Grampanchayat, Boduppal siluated ai chenigicherla Village, Boduppal Muncipar corporation, Medipalli [Vlandal, Ivladchat Malkajgiri Dist., pending disposal of the writ petition No. of 2024.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI S.NAGESH REDDY

¶25

KATRAM, counsel for the Respondents No.1to5 ' :E lbTA!,rrJltI.REDDy

¶26

Counsel for the Respondents No.6 : SRI BHUKyA MANGILAL NAlt(, GP FOR ENDOWNMENTS

¶27

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶28

i1

¶29

Y

¶30

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICEN.V.SHRAVANKUMAR}

¶31

WRIT PETITION^{N0.12355 of2024}

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

The writ petition^{is filed questioningthe action of the} respondent^{No.S in not registering the sale deed in respect of} Plot No.43D in Part^{of Sy.No.33/10and 33/11 admeasuring} 381 square^{yardsor 318.51Sq'Meters',in Aravinda Colony in} sanctioned Iay out^{proceedings No'73/68, dated 07-04-68 by} the Grampanchayat,^{Boduppal situatedat ChengicherlaVillage'} Boduppal Municipal^{Corporation,Medipalli Mandal' Medchal} Malkajgiri District,^{which is not included in the prohibitory list} as prepared^U 1s.22^{A(2)(c) of Registration Act' as illega1'} unlawfull, contrary^{and against the provisions of Registration} and Stamp Act^{and consequentlydirect the 5th respondentto} accept and register^{the same in respectof the above property} and release^{the sale deed.}

¶34

2.Heard,SriK.L.N.Swamy,learnedCounsel'appearingfor the petitioner^{and Sri MuralidharReddyKataram'learned} Government^{Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondent}

¶35

2

¶36

Nos. I to t5 ar:Ld Sri Bhukya Mangilal Naik, learnecl ()overnment Pieader for Endowments, appearing for Respondent 1tro.6 . 3. The briel'facts of the case are that the petitione r claims to have purchased scheduled land originally to an extent of Ac.21.OO guntas in Sy.No.33/10 and Sy.No.33,/11, r;ituated at Chengicherla Village, which was converted i,to non_algricultural land vide pr.<:eedings No.Dis.B1/4 69/6g, dated 26.O1.196g passed b1, the District Collector of Hyderabad and rhereaJter, converted the said land into plots vide layout Sanction No.73/68, clateC OZ.O4. 196g, which was situated outside the urbaa agglomer;ation arrd that the provisions of the UL,J Act will not attract. Tl-rereafter, petitioner has enter.ed i nto sale agreement onI6.O4.2O24 and_ the same was refusecl by the respondent No,rj, vide order No.166, dated 20.O4.2024, stating that the said l,and was notified as Endowment L€md and Prohibited from eggishation. euestioning the same the present wnt petition is filr:d 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed a copv of the prohibited list in .which survey No. 33/ 1O as per the prohibited property of chengicherla [v), Survey.No. 33/10 is beerr listed

¶37

Y

¶38

3

¶39

showing authorities as T.L.P. Charities,^{Tanaka,Secunderabad.} Survey No.33/ 1O is spread in^{various extentof land in which 6} Acres 33 guntas is being classified as^{Endowments Iand} showing the name of the authority^{T.L.P. Charities,Tarnaka,} Secunderabad in Sy.No. 33/10.^{Learned counsel for the} petitioner further submits that^{permission was sought from the} Gram Panchayath, Chengicherla^{Village and the Commissioner,} Boduppal Corporation has^{approvedthe layout underlayout} Regularization Scheme, 2O2O^{videproceedingsdated} 20.O4.2O24 regularizing un-approved^{plot/layoutto an extent} of 275.92 Sq.mts (330 sq.yards,^{situated at Plot No' 43D of} Survey No. 33/ 10^{part and 33} 111^{part of the subject property} in favour of the^{petitioners-Vendor.Admittedly, title deed is not} filed in the present writ Petition.

¶40

Learned Government^{Pleaderfor Endowmentscontended} that the writ petition^{involves disputed questions of fact and} that the petitioner is trying^{to dispute the very title and the} petitioner ought to have sought^{declaration of the title at the} first instance before^{the Telangana Endowments Tribunal under}

¶41

r.l

¶42

4

¶43

Section B7(1)r,c) of the Endowments Act 30 of 19g7. Instead of following other remedies, petitioner filed the present wit petition under Artici e,. 226 of Constitution of India, which is not at all maintainabie. It is further submitted that the said T.L.p. Charities (.,s;ubject trust,,), No.1O, Uppal Road, Taranaka, Secunderabarl was founded on OZ .Og .1966 for charitable purpose such as promotion of education among poor and needy students and aiso to provide medical relief to the poor. The subject trust ,;.as registered under the pror.ision s of the Section 38 of the E)rdowments Act 7Z of 1966 (Repealed) vide Registration (tr:rtificate No. 6g, dt: 04.06. 1926 and that the administration of the subject trust has been taken <:are of by the self styled rranaging trustees since its inception. Learned Governmenl pleader further submits that subsequent to repeal of the Endou,nrent Act dated 17 .19.1966, it was registered under Section 43 of Charitable Endowments Act, 1987

¶44

At this juncture it is necessary to refer to the orcler of the Hontrle Divisior-r Bench of this Court in W.A.No. I42S of 2024, dated 24.12.20,.24. Wherein, the Honble Division Benc:h, while considering the order passed by the learned Single .rudge in

¶45

II

¶46

W.P.No. 30423 of 2024, dated 3O. LO.2024, at para No.7 held as

¶47

under:

¶48

It is pertinent to mention here that tlrc appellant as uell as respondent I[o.6 is claiming rights ouer tLe subject propertA. As there are seious disputes uith regard to right, title and possession of the subject propertA, learned Single Judge ightly dismissed the utrit petition and granted liberty to the appellant to approach the Endowments Tribunal for adjudicating her right and entitlement ouer the subject propertA. "

¶49

In view of the above, since there are disputed question of facts with regard to the title ald possession, which cannot be decided on aflidavits and as per the^judgments of the Apex Court in Shubhas Jain V.RaJeswari Shiao;zrl and Radha Krishna Industries u. Stdte of Himachal Pradeshz, the writ petition is devoid of merits and fails and accordingly dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to pursue remedies as available under law.

¶50

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

¶51

| 2o2l scc online sc 562

¶52

'^{(2021)6 scc 771}

¶53

6

¶54

\

¶55

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,

¶56

sha-ll stan<l closed.

SD/-N. SRIHARI AR

//TRUE COPY//

ER

To,

.!,

1 The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, State of Telangana Hyderabad.

¶63

The Commissioner and lnspector General of Registrarion and Stamps, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶64

J. The District Collector, Madchal Malkajgiri Dist.,

¶65

4 The Diskict Rellistrar, I\iladchal - Malkajgiri Dist.,

¶66

The Sub-Regislrar, Narapally, lt/edchal tVlalkajgiri Dist, 6 The Assistant C;ommissioner, Endowments Department, Secunderabad. 7. One CC to SRI S.NAGESH REDDY, Advocate. [OPUC] o_ One CC to SRI BHUKYA MANGILAL NAIK, Advocate [OPUC]

¶67