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

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1962

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
E.V.VENUGOPAL, J.
Erla Sayanna – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others – Respondents
W.P.No.39708 of 2025
Decided On : 24-12-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Katika Ravinder Reddy
For the Respondent: GP For Revenue

Ex-servicemen assigned land can freely alienate it after ten years under specific government orders, irrespective of prohibitive conditions in assignment deeds.

Headnote:(A) Revenue Laws - G.O.Ms.No.743 dated 30-04-1963 and G.O.Ms.No.1117 dated 11-11-1993 - Assignment and alienation of land assigned to ex-servicemen - The High Court upheld the principle that ex-servicemen assigned lands are freely alienable after a certain period, notwithstanding any conditions in the Deeds of Assignment. (Paras 69-73)

(B) Administrative Procedure - The requirement for authorities to consider and validate land transactions properly, ensuring due process and opportunity to be heard. (Para 10)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner challenged the legality of proceedings by the District Collector regarding a land issue, claiming rightful ownership through a valid purchase from the original assignee, an ex-serviceman. The assignee had been granted a patta, making the land transferable after ten years from assignment under relevant government orders.

Findings of Court:
The court found the proceedings to lack due consideration of established legal principles and the valid sale deed, leading to improper classification in the prohibitory list.

Issues: The main issues were the validity of the sale deed, the authority of the District Collector to maintain prohibitory status, and due process in considering the petitioner’s application.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the impugned proceedings were invalid due to failure to follow prescribed legal protocols and recognized that the sale deed should have been verified before categorizing the land under the prohibitory list.

Result: Writ Petition allowed; impugned proceedings set aside, matter remanded for fresh consideration.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's land entitlement based on revenue records. (Para 2 , 3 , 8)
2. assignment of lands to ex-servicemen is alienable. (Para 4 , 11)
3. the authority must verify sale deeds before proceedings. (Para 5 , 10)
4. responses sought by petitioner for revenue corrections. (Para 6 , 7)

ORDER :

This Writ Petition is being disposed of with the consent of both the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondents at the admission stage.

2. This Writ Petition is filed to declare the impugned proceedings dated 30-09-2024 issued by the 3rd respondent-District Collector, Nirmal District, in proceedings No.E2/805/2024, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 to 5 to correct the revenue records in the Dharnai web portal in respect of the petitioner’s land admeasuring Ac.5.00 gts in Sy. No.227/8 of Aloor village, Sarangapur Mandal, Nirmal District by i) Changing the land nature from assigned patta land to patta land; ii) Deleting the POT Case status; iii) Changing transaction status from assigned land to patta land; iv) De-notifying the land from the prohibitory list and v) Updating all revenue records including pahanies, IB, ROR and portal data accordingly.

3. Heard Sri Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. Perused the material available on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land having purchased the said land from one Smt. Thota Yerra Bhai through a Sada Bainama dated 13-07-2022. Smt. Yerra Bhai is the wife of late Jyothi Sipayi who was the original assignee of the subject land under the ex-servicemen quota as evidenced by the Final Patta Certificate dated 14-02-1975 as her husband was an army employee bearing No.5632302. He would further submit that as per G.O.Ms.No.743 dated 30-04-1963 and G.O.Ms.No.1117 dated 11-11-1993, the allottee is entitled to freely alienate the assigned land after ten years from the date of assignment even without any permission from the Government. This legal position is categorically upheld by this Court in BHEL Employees Mutually Aided Co-operative Society v. State of Telangana , 2021 (3) ALT 146 (D.B.) wherein, this Court held that ex-servicemen assigned lands are freely alienable and cannot be treated as prohibited or non-alienable lands. In para Nos.69 to 73, it was held as under:

“69. Even otherwise, if there is an assignment of land to a person, who is an ex-servicemen, and he is a landless poor person entitled for assignment, even if by some error, the said assignment was made quoting G.O.Ms.No.1406 Revenue dt.25.07.1958 and not mentioning G.O.Ms.No.743 dt.30.04.1963 or G.O.Ms.No.1117 dt.11.11.1993, we are of the opinion that the assignees, who are admittedly ex-servicemen are still entitled to the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.1117 dt.11.11.1993 despite the existence of any condition in the Deed of Assignment prohibiting alienation.

70. Similar view has been taken by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Ande Narasimha Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh (7) 2013 (3) ALT 500, and by the High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in Thatisetty Kusuma Kumari and others v. Sub-Registrar, Anandapuram, Visakhapatnam District and others (8) AIR 2017 A.P. 713.

71. In Ande Narasimha Rao (7 supra), an ex-servicemen was granted assignment of land by the State without mentioning G.O.Ms.No.743 dt.30.04.1963. The assignment deed also contained a condition prohibiting transfer of property while permitting enjoyment of the same by inheritance.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that despite existence of the said condition, the petitioner is still entitled to the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.1117 dt.11.11.1993 and he was entitled to sell away the assigned land after ten year

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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