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

2026 Supreme(Telangana) 77

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
T.MADHAVI DEVI, J.
Sujanashri Gavirneni and others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others – Respondents
Writ Petition No.36845 of 2017, Writ Petition No.28496 of 2021 And Writ Petition No.33938 of 2024 
Decided On : 27-01-2026 

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : PONNAM ASHOK GOUD
For the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE (TG)

Notifications claiming property as Waqf land are invalid without proper survey and notice to concerned parties, emphasizing due process under the Waqf Act.

Headnote:(A) Registration Act, 1908 - Section 22A - Waqf Act, 1954 - Writ petitions seeking to declare letters of the Waqf Board illegal and set aside prohibitory lists regarding land ownership - Court emphasized the necessity of conducting a proper survey and notice to concerned parties before declaring land as Waqf property - The existence of historical land grants and auctions was acknowledged, and lack of valid grounds for Waqf claims was noted. (Paras 4, 13, 14)

(B) Judicial review - The court established that without conducting procedures mandated under the Waqf Act, the notifications regarding the property are invalid, as confirmed by prior judgments and the necessity for due process. (Paras 10, 14)

Facts of the case:
The land in dispute has seen complex ownership and auction history, initially granted to an individual, later auctioned, and involved claims from the Waqf Board asserting it as Waqf property without conducting the requisite procedure.

Findings of Court:
The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring the Waqf Board's notifications ineffective and emphasizing that ownership rights are established through auctions and subsequent sales.

Issues: Primarily addressed the legal validity of claims by the Waqf Board over the subject land without proper procedural compliance under relevant laws.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that statutory due process must be observed before recognizing Waqf claims and upheld prior rulings emphasizing the invalidity of notifications lacking proper procedure.

Result: Writ petitions allowed.

Table of Content
1. historical ownership and auction details (Para 1 , 2)
2. commissioner's orders and partition suit outcomes (Para 3 , 4)
3. challenging prohibition on registration claim (Para 5 , 8)
4. subsequent petitioners' claims and issues (Para 6 , 7)
5. court's requirement for valid recognition of waqf lands (Para 9 , 10 , 12)
6. court's final ruling on invalidity of notification (Para 13 , 14)
7. judgment outcome and closure (Para 15 , 16)

ORDER :

T.MADHAVI DEVI, J.

W.P.No.36845 of 2017 has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring letter No.3/WPO/KIZ/2011 dt.31.10.2011 and letter No.M1/54/RR/Prot/84-Supply-1 dt.10.12.2013 of respondent No.7 and Muntakhab No.54/M1/Tel-I/RR/84 dt.27.03.2004 published in A.P. Gazette No.22 dt.27.05.2004 at page No.599, as illegal and as contrary to Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 and consequently to set aside the same and suspend the proceedings to the extent it concerns the lands/plots of the petitioners in Survey No.66/1 situated at Trimulgherry Village, Secunderabad, Hyderabad District and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of W.P.No.36845 of 2017 are that the land in Survey No.62 of Trimulgherry Village was in the name of Koh-e-Imam Zamin from 1330 Fasli (1920 AD) up to 1339 Fasli (1929 AD) as per the correspondence available in Tahsil’s File No.40/11 of 1343 Fasli. In 1339 Fasli corresponding to 1929 AD, the land was resumed by the Government from Koh-e-Imam Zamin and it was in the possession of the Government. In 1351 Fasli, i.e., 1941 AD, the Collector, Aatraf Balda District addressed the Letter No.1129 to the Tahsildar North that the land should be auctioned under Laoni rules and accordingly, auction proposals were submitted for his confirmation. It is stated that a notification for auction of this land falling in Survey No.62 of Trimulgherry was issued and auction was conducted and one Sri Kalika Prasad became the auction purchaser for Rs.250/- and the auction was confirmed by the Collector vide his letter No.341 dt.04.03.1352 Fasli, i.e., 1942 AD and the possession of land admeasuring Ac.5.08 guntas was also delivered to Sri Kalika Prasad as per the letter of Moulvi Syed Mustafa Ali Khan, Collector of Hyderabad District addressed to the Tahsildar North and by letter No.1642 dated 29 Maher, 1352 Fasli, the Tahsildar informed the Maqdam Patwari of Trimulgherry Village that higher office of District through Letter No.341 dated 04 Bahman 1352 Fasli, the land has been finally auctioned through the three times auction in the name of Mr. Kalika Prasad for a sum of Rs.250/- and that the auction bidder had deposited the said amount in the treasury of the District at the Ledger Folio No.154 dated 2nd Bahman, 1352 Fasli and that the possession of the land be delivered to the purchaser and accordingly, in Jamabandi of 1352 Fasli, the alienation of the patta be caused in the name of the purchaser and the proceedings be submitted at the time of Jamabandi. However, without reference to the above documents, on 18.01.1951, Muntakhab No.13 of 1951 was issued in respect of the land falling in Survey No.62 (old) new Survey No.66/1 by the Commissioner of Atiyat. It is stated that no notice and no opportunity was given to Sri Kalika Prasad who was already in the possession of the property as pattadar much before the proceedings of the Commissioner of Atiyat dt.18.01.1951. It is stated that at Column No.8 of Muntakhab No.13 of 1951, it is mentioned that by order dt.12.12.1950 of the Additional Collector of Hyderabad District, the Inam land was restored in the name of Chilla Hazrat Imam Zamin Ali Moosa Raza Ale Salaam perpetually and that Syed Ali Zaidi has been appointed and sanctioned the performance of service. It is stated that the alleged proceedings dt.12.12.1950 of the Additional Collector restoring the land back to the Dargah are not available and further that neither the auction that was conducted nor the confirmation nor the handing over of posses

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