SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Telangana) 1157

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J.
Ravi Venkata Ramana and Others - Appellants
Versus 
State of Telangana and Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 22877 of 2023
Decided On : 14-10-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : P. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, N. Vishal
For the Respondent: Chalapathi Rao

Authorities must exercise cancellation powers within a reasonable time, especially when no fraud is present and ownership has significantly changed over time.

Headnote:(A) A.P. (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli - Section 166-B - Land assignment - Cancellation of assignment dated 06.06.2023 deemed unreasonable after 19 years delayed action by authorities and lack of evident fraud - The court recognizes the changed ownership of assigned land and the hardships faced by purchasers. (Paras 1, 3, 9, 13, 15)

(B) Administrative Procedure - It is essential for authorities to act within a reasonable time, particularly when issuing show cause notices for land assignment irregularities. The passage of time must be considered along with any changes in ownership. (Paras 3, 11, 14)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners contested the cancellation of their land assignment dating back to 2002 ordered by authorities in 2023, arguing that the delay in cancellation was unreasonable and the sale was conducted with appropriate permissions. (Paras 1, 2, 3)

Findings of Court:
The Court found the delay in cancellation proceedings to be excessive, and the change of multiple hands of ownership warranted preserving the assignments in the interest of justice. (Paras 13, 15)

Issues: The central issues included whether the delay in cancelling land assignments was unreasonable and whether the assignment was conducted with appropriate authority. (Paras 3, 15)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the authorities must exercise their powers within a reasonable time, and substantial delays without fraud allegations invalidate the cancellation of assignments, maintaining that the interests of third parties formed a critical aspect of the decision. (Paras 13, 15)

Result: Writ petition allowed; impugned order set aside.

Table of Content
1. assignment of land and procedural compliance. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments on unreasonable delay in cancellation. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's observations on procedural irregularities and delay. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. legal principles regarding reasonable time for actions. (Para 9 , 10)
5. conclusion to set aside the impugned order. (Para 15 , 16)

ORDER :

1. The impugned proceedings No.E1/1064-2016-1 dated 06.06.2023 was passed by the respondent No.2-District Collector, Sangareddy District, in exercise of his jurisdiction under Section 166 -B of A.P. (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, cancelling the assignment of the land admeasuring Ac.5.00 guntas situated in Sy.No.9 of Osman Nagar Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District, granted to the original assignee vide assignment proceedings No.B/1237/2002 dated 28.12.2002 issued by the respondent No.5 – Tahsildar, Ramchandrapuram Mandal, Sanga Reddy District.

2. The facts of the case, as pleaded by the petitioners, in brief, are as under:

(a) Originally one viz. Govu Shankaraiah S/o. Mallaiah, a Freedom Fighter made an application for assignment of land to the respondent No.5. The application was considered by the respondent No.5 vide Proceedings No.B/1237/2002 dated 28.12.2002 and the assignment orders were issued assigning Ac.5.00 guntas land (hereinafter referred to as assigned land) in favour of Sri Govu Shankaraiah in Sy.No.9, Osman Nagar Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal. Thereafter, the said Shankaraiah was also issued Final Patta Certificate by the respondent No.5 vide proceedings No.B/1237/2002. Consequently, the respondent No.5 also issued patta passbooks and title deeds to Govu Shankaraiah vide Patta Pass Book No.360 and Nos.425914 and 446347 respectively and his name was entered as pattadar and possessor in pahanies, which is evident from Pahani for the year 2006-2007.

(b) The said Shankaraiah made an application to the respondent authorities seeking permission to alienate the assigned land and accordingly a No Objection Certificate was issued by the respondent No.2-Collector on 17.05.2005 vide letter No.E1/3072/2005. Thereafter, the original assignee, Govu Shankaraiah, sold the property to Syed Jameel and Syed Naseem by way of registered sale deed bearing Document No.31580/2006, dated 21.12.2006 as per the NOC issued by the Collector, Medak. Thereafter the said Shankaraiah died in the year 2007.

(c) Subsequently, Syed Jameel and Syed Naseem sold the assigned land to Ravi Venkataramana (petitioner No.1) by way of registered Sale Deed bearing document No.8229/2009 dated 16.09.2009, who, in turn, sold the assigned land to the petitioners No.4 and 5 under registered sale deeds bearing documents Nos.11714/2009 and 11715/2009 dated 29.12.2009.

(d) While so, the respondent No.3-Joint Collector, Sangareddy issued a show cause notice No.E1/1064/2016-1 dated 26.03.2016 to the petitioners stating that the Tahsildar, Ramchandrapuram, has not followed procedure in assigning the land in favour of freedom fighters; no permission was obtained by the District Collector from the Government for assigning the land to freedom fighters; further the assignee is native of Sangareddy whereas the land that has been allotted is in Ramachandrapuram Mandal; the assignee has given an affidavit before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ramchandrapuram, stating that he was allotted Government land at Cheriyal village of Sangareddy Mandal under freedom fighter quota and without verifying the said fact, the MRO has made assignment in Osman Nagar; the MRO without obtaining any permission from HMDA assigned the land to the assignee, though the land comes under purview of HMDA limits; Shankaraiah sold the land to Syed Jameel and Syed Naseem within four years from the date of assignment whereas as per G.O.Ms.No.1045 Revenue (Assn.I) Department dated 15.12.2004 the freedom fighters are free to sell away the assigned lands only after ten years; the assignee obtained NOC from

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top