Smt. Thatipamula Anasuya Vs The State of Telangana

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUST]CE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 5144 OF 202s

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Thatipamula Anasuya, Wo. Late Sri Thatipamula Nagaiah, Aged about: 74 yegp, QcgOn. House-hold, Ri./o. Plot No. 129, Road No.'t5, Prashasan Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 500 033.

¶9

...PETITlONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'l . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Mancherial District, Mancherial.

¶13

The Additional Collector (Revenue), Mancherial District, Mancherial.

¶14

The Tahsildar, Bellampally Mandal, Mancherial District.

¶15

,..RESPONDENTS

¶16

P€;tition under Article 226 ot 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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the inaction of the 2nd and 3'd Respondents in not acting upon and passing orders on MeeSeva application bearing No. 2400006238 dated 20.O4.2024 and further in not considering the representation dated 18.11.2024 which is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondent No. 2 and 3 to act upon and to pass orders on the application No, 2400006238 dated 20.04.2024 made through MeeSeva and further direct to consider the representation dated18.11 .2024 of the petitioner, which is in violation of the basic tenets of Laws.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶18

Petition uncrer Section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstzrnces stated in the affidavit filed irr suprport of the petition, the High court may be pl,3ased to direct the Respondents rnore particurarry 2nd and 3'd Respondents herein t, act upon and pass orders on Meeseva apprication bearing No. 2400006238 dated 20t04t2024 0f the Petitioner, pen^jing disposal of the Writ petition.

¶19

lA NO: 2 OF 2o25

¶20

Petition und-'r Sr>ction 1sl cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in sup'cort of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondents nrore particurarry 2nd and 3.d Respondents herein tc consider and act upon the repre sent;rtion dated 19t11t2o24 of the petitioner, perding disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S. ABHAYA KUMAR SAGAR

¶22

Counsel forthe Resporrdents: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made th,r folrowing: ORDER

¶24

ry

¶25

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BIIASI(AR REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.5144 of 2025

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief

¶29

"....to issue a Wit of Mandamus or ang other appropriate tDit declaring that the inaction of the 2"d and 3d respondents in not acting upon and passirtg orders on MeeSeua application bearing No.24OOOO6238 dated 20/ 04/ 2024 and further in not consideing the representation dated 18/11/2024 uthich is illegal and arbitrary and con sequentlg direct the Respondent Nos_2 and 3 to act upon and to pass orders on the application No. 24000O6238 dated 20/O4/2O24 made through Mee-Seua and further direct to consider the representation dated 18/ 11/2024 of the petitioner uthich is in uiolation of the basic tenets of Laws...."

¶30

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

¶31

The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.S-OO guntas in Sy.No. 101 /e and Acs.S-0O guntas in Sy.No.1O1/e1 situated at Kannala Village, Bellampally Mandal, Mancherial District, having purchased the same under registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.14 and 15 of 1998, dated 16.O1.1998 respectively, arid the revenue authorities have mutated her name in the revenue records and also issued pattadar passbooks with Khata No.287 and Passbook

¶32

2

¶33

No.TlSOl CO2|)O93 in her favour. It is the case of the petitioner that when the said property was listed in prohibited properties list under the provisions of the Registration Act, 190g, she submitte(l ir:r application through Mee- seva bearing No.240OOO 52313, dated 2O.O4.2O24 and also a representation, dated 18.1 -.2r)24 duly enclosing the documents seekinlJ to delete from the ,troh ibited list of property. The grievan<:e of the petitioner i s tl.at even after receiving the said application, no action has lreen taken by the respondents.

¶34

Learn ed <:ounsel for the petitioner submitted thrrt as the subject lan 1s zLre not in the list of prohibitory prope rties, the Sub-Registrar h.as entertained the sale deeds, and conl;equently issued the l)atlzrdar passbooks in favour of the petitioner, ald at no point of rim,:, the revenue authorities have objected sirle deeds stating that the said lands are assigrred lands and the r;ame are prohibited lor alienation. It is further submitted tha:t in the absence o{ conducting enquiry or issuing notice to the pr3fiti6ns1, the respondr:nts are not having any power or authority t,t list the subject lands oi the petitioner in the list of prohibited prc,perties.

¶35

Sri L. Ravjnder, learned Assistant Government pleradsl fe1 Revenue aplrearing for the respondents has not disputed about

Y ,/'^.

I

J

the purchase of the subject lands by the petitioner under registered sale deed and consequential issuance of pattadar passbooks in her favour. It is further submitted that the Subsection (4) of Section 22-A of tlre Registration Act, 19O8 (for short "the Act") confers the power on the State Government either suo motu or on an application by any person or for giving effect to the frnal orders of the High Court of Telangana or Supreme Court of India to proceed to de-notiff, either in full or in part, the notifrcation issued under sub section (21 and the Rules made under the provisions of the Act.

¶40

\

¶41

It is settled law that as per Section 5 of the Telangana Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, (for short 'ActJ, the assigned lands are prohibited for transfer, and if any such transfer is being a-ffected by the Sub-Registrar, he is liable for imprisonment of six months. A prestimption has been drawn that once registered sale deed is executed, the nature of the lands is not assigned lands and it is patta lands, and more particularly in the absence of conducting any enquiry under the provisions of the Act, the respondents a-re not having any power or authority to noti-$r the subject lands in the^prohibitory list^of

¶42

I I

¶43

4

¶44

properties, z-trd however, the said issues required to be decided after calling lor records by the District Collector.

¶45

in vierl of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of tlLis vrrit petition directing the respondent authorities to examine the erpplication submitted by the petitioner and pass a reasoned crder within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a t:opy of this order and communicate the same to the petitione^'.

¶46