Writ petition seeking release of mortgage deeds/bonds over allotted lands after loan waiver under the State debt waiver scheme was allowed by the Court in terms of its earlier order dated 13.11.2015 in W.P.No.24590 of 2015, with a direction that legal heir certificates be filed for deceased loanees.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3300 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
IMONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 30939 OF 2025
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more parlicularly one in the nature of Writ of lvlandamus,
a) to declare the inaction of the fourth respondent in not releasing the mortgage deeds / bonds of petitioners lands situated in the Survey Nrt..144. .145 and-146 of ldikuda village, chandur mandal, Nalgonda District inspite of the loans obtained by the petitioners for purchasing the said lands are waived off by the first respondent, as has been confirmed by the third respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, unJUSt apart from violative of principles of natural justice.
b) to consequently direct the fourth respondent to forthwith rerlease the mortgage deeds /bonds of the petitioners lands situated in Survey lJo.144, 145 and 146 situated in ldikuda village of chandur mandal, Nalgonda District by issuing clearance letters lo Registering Authorities i.e., respondent lro 5 herein.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the ci|cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith release the mortgage bonds ide,erls to the petitioners by issuing clearance letter i.e., clearance of the loan and urterest under the debt waiver scheme, pendrng disposal of the Writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PRABHAKAR BOMMAGANI
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR COOPERATION
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 4: SRt T.V.RAMESH, SC FOR SCFCL
Counsel for the Respondent No.3, 5 & 6: Gp FOR REVENUE:
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION No.3O939 of 2O2S
ORDER:
Fleard Sri B. Prabhakar, learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Government Pleader for Cooperation, for respondent No.1; Sri T.V. Ramesh, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 4 and learned Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6.
Y-.1
2
reference
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any. sha| star-id closed.
To,
o,3,'JiI*oflA[t,TiHtl //rRUE COPY// d SECTION OFFICER
N2
(Along with the copy of order dated 13.11.2015, in w.r).No.24s90 or 2o1s)
BSR
.- \
-- 'r-- q
\l
CC TODAY
HIGH COURT
DATED: 1311012025
:a.
tv.<br>tl
v) s
:i':
\s
)
I ..1- <br>F.<br>ORDER
r.)
!41!' .,9-
WP.No.30939 of 2025
ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION,
WITHOUT COSTS
,
\D
)
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE M.S.RAI\iIACHANDRARAO
WP.No-221590 ol 2015
ORDER
Heard Sri N. Krishna Rao, counsel forpetitioners, and Sri M. Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for 2nd respondent-Corporation
acknowledges that the waiver of loan makes lhe beneficiaries of the scheme, such as the petitioners, loan-free from the District Societies, but states that the lands cannol be made available for sale by petitioners since they are members of the District Societies under the land purchase scheme, dnd are governed by the instructions issued by 2nd respondent by a circular dt.O1.08.2005. The Vice-Chairman and Managing Director of 2nd respondent directed not to release the lands from the mortgage of District Societies and keep the mortgage deeds in the sate custody of 3'd respondent. Relying on this communication, the respondents contended thal even though the documents of title in respect of the lands are in the names of petitioners and even though their loans have been waived under the loan waiver scheme, the respondents are entitled to retain the mortgage deeds/bonds.
the mortgage deeds/bonds, if lhere are subsisting loarrs, due by the petitioners. But once the loans ofpetitioners hat,e been waived by the State, under Law, lhe respondenls are no entitled to retain the mortgage deeds/bonds and such..action,,rrhatever be its laudable objective, violates Article .l 4 and 300 ,\ of the Constitution of lndia. Since it is not disputed that petitioners are owners of the plots allotted to thern, any restraint on pctitoncrs to sell the said lands would violate Section 1 1 of the Tra nsfer of Property Act, 1882, and the pelitioners are entitled to ignore any restraint on lheir right to alienate or encumber the land irrposed by respondents. The respondents are also not enlitled lo retain the mortgage bondsideed executed by petitionerl, since admittedly lhe loans of all petitionr:rs have been warvcc by the State Government,
J USTICE M.S.RAMACHANDR,\ RAO
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Parvatham Salamma
Kondapalli Lingamma
Kondapalli Sivaramulu
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Co-operation Department Secretariat, Hyderabad
The State Scheduled Caste Finance Corporation Limited, rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Hyderabad
The District Collector, Nalgonda District
Nagesh Bheemapaka
M.S. Ramachandr Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
