Disposed¶41

Mala Shantamma v. The Joint Collector

Telangana HC10 Feb 2025WP/21652/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 38-E certificate of ownership; Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950; Joint Collector Ranga Reddy District; writ of certiorari; W.P. No. 21652 of 2002; remand from C.R.Ps. Nos. 4386 and 4364 of 1995; facts similar to C.R.P. No. 4201 of 1992; liberty to approach Civil Court; writ disposed without costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: no interference with the Joint Collector's order dated 02.03.2002; parties left at liberty to work out their remedies as available under law; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed. ¶41

Mala Shantamma Vs The Joint Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ court should interfere with the order dated 02.03.2002 passed by the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District (Respondent No.1) relegating the parties to the competent Civil Court. +2 more

¶30

Court's answer

In view of counsel for the petitioners' submission that the petitioners contemplate taking steps to file an appropriate application before the competent Civil Court, there is no reason to interfere with the order dated 02.03.2002 passed by respondent No.1 (Joint Collector); the Court does not hold a different view from that taken by respondent No.1.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

The parties are at liberty to work out their remedies as available under law.

¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 226) by legal heirs claiming through a predecessor-in-title, challenging the order dated 02.03.2002 of the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District in Proceedings F2/511/A/98, which arose on remand from the orders dated 08.12.1997 in C.R.Ps. Nos. 4386 and 4364 of 1995 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh) directing fresh consideration of the date of issuance and finality of the certificate of ownership under Section 38-E of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 and the dates of delivery of possession. On reconsideration, the Joint Collector found the facts similar to C.R.P. No. 4201 of 1992 and directed the parties to seek appropriate remedies before the competent Civil Court. Counsel for the petitioners informed the Court that the petitioners intended to file appropriate proceedings before the Civil Court. Holding that there was no reason to interfere with the Joint Collector's order and declining to take a different view, the High Court (N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.) disposed of the writ petition, leaving the parties free to work out their remedies as available under law, closing pending miscellaneous applications, with no order as to costs.

¶1

[^32s51

¶2

l I

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 21652 OF 2002

¶9

Between:

¶10

Mala Shantamma, W/o Late Mala Anthaiah, aged about 75 years, Occ: Housewife, Fl/o Shankerpally Mandal, Rangareddi District.

¶11

Smt.Bhagyavathi, Wo Late Mala Jangaiah, aged about 55 years, Occ: Housewife, Rl/o Railways Quarters, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶12

B.Srinivas, S/o Late Mala Jangaiah, aged about 30 years, Occ: Employee, R/o Railways Quarters, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶13

B.Anil Kumar, S/o Late Mala Jangaiah, aged about 25 years, Occ: Private Employee, Fl/o Railways Quarters, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶14

B.Vinod Kumar, S/o Late Mala Jangaiah, aged about 23 years, Occ: Private Employee, Rl/o Railways Quarters, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶15

Kumari B.Jaya Sree, D/o Late Mala Jangaiah, W/o Srinivas, aged about 21 years, Occ: Private Employee, Rl/o Railways Quarters, Nampally, Hyderabad. .

¶16

B.Vidyavathi, D/o Late Mala Jangaiah, aged about 19 years, Occ: Student,^' R/o Railways Quarters, Nampally, Hyderabad. All are represented by their G.P.A.Holder Sri Nagaiah, S/o Bagaiah, aged about 70 years, Rl/o Shankarpally Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶17

,..PETITIONERS

¶18

AND

¶19

The Joint Collector, Rangareddi District.

¶20

M/s The Madhavi Theatre, Rep.by its Proprietor, Sri Chandeeswar, shankerpally' Rangareddv District'

¶21

...RES,.NDENT.

¶22

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 a Writ, Order or Directions, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari Calling for the records from the Respondent in Proceedings No.F2l51 1/A/98 and declare the order dated 02.03.2002 in Proceedings No.F2l511lAl98.

¶23

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2002(WPMP. NO: 27125 OF 2002')

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to suspend theorder daled2.3.2002 in Proceedings No.F2l5 11/A/98.

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI M.V.DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1: AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI RESU MAHENDER REDDY

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{N.V.SHRAVANKUMAR}

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.21652^{OF 2OO2}

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

Questioning^{the Order dated O2'03.2OO2of the Joint} Collector, Ranga Reddy District/Respondent^{No.1, the present} writ petition is filed.

¶31

The Hon'ble High Court^{of Andhra Pradeshhas disposed of} two Civil Revision^{Petitions bearing Nos.4386of 1995 and 4364} of 1995 dated 08.12.1997^{directing the appellateauthorityto} consider the entire^{question afresh and decide as to on what} date the certilicate under^{Section 38-E of the Act was granted in} favour of the predecessor-in-title.^{In view of the said directions,} Joint Collector, Ranga^{Reddy District/RespondentNo' 1 has} raised the following issues,^{which are extracted as under:}

¶32

"1) On that date the certificate^{of ownership under} Section 38-E of the Andhra^{Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy} and Agricultural Lands Act,^{1950 was issued in favour of the} predecessor-in-title of the^{petitioners was givenand whether the} same has become frnal?

¶33

On what date the^{possessionof the land in question} has been delivered to the appellants^{herein or ttreir predecessor-} in-title?

¶34

Whether the^{possession of the land was delivered to} the appellants or their^{predecessor-in-title in respect of the la;rd}

¶35

:i2.i

¶36

under the occupation of the respondents after the grant of Certificate under Section 38-E of the Tenancy Act?,,.

¶37

After discussing the facts in brief and issues raised in the appeal, the. Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District vide order dated O2.03.2002 held.that the facts of the case are similar to the facts nar.rated in C.R.P.No.42O| of 1992 and opined that the parties should workout their remedies before the competent Civil Court and directed to approach Civil Court for appropriate remedies.

¶38

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that as per the instructions of the petitioner(s) and after going through the order dated O2.O3.2OO2, the petitioner is contemplating to take steps in filing appropriate application before the competent Civil Court and pursue the matter. In view of the said submission, there is no reason to interfere with the order dated O2.O3.2OO2 passed by the respondent No.l and this Court do not hold a different vier,v with the view taken by respondent No. 1.

¶39