Land relinquished under Form-C vests absolutely in the Government and cannot be reconveyed to original owners if used for public purposes, affirming public trust obligations.

JUDGMENT :

Since the issues that arise in the above writ petition and writ appeal are integrally one and the same, the writ petition and writ appeal are being disposed of by this common Judgment.

2. The W.P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025 and W.A.No.109 of 2025, though instituted through separate proceedings, pertain to the same subject property admeasuring Ac.6.00 gts in Sy.Nos. 859, 860 and 861 of Mothkur Village, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri (erstwhile Nalgonda) District. The principal question that arises for determination is whether land relinquished in favour of the Government under Form-C of the Telangana Land Revenue Rules, 1951 (for short ‘Rules 1951’) for a specified public purpose may thereafter be reconveyed to the original owners, and whether any such exercise is legally sustainable.

3. For the sake of convenience, the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025 is referred hereinafter as ‘petitioner’.

4. Respondent Nos.1 to 6 in W.P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025 and appellants in W.A.No.109 of 2025 being official respondents, are referred as ‘State’.

5. Respondent Nos.7 and 8 in W.P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025; respondents in W.A.No.109 of 2025 and writ petitioners in W.P.No.27037 of 2014 being one and the same, are referred as ‘respondent Nos.7 and 8’ for the sake of adjudication of the case.

6. Heard Sri Dr. Kadiri Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners in W .P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025; Sri E.Venkata Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department appearing for respondent No.1 in W.P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025; Sri Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned Government Pleader for Revenue Department appearing for appellants in W.A.No.109 of 2025 and respondent Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6 in W.P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025; Smt.Gudipati Sharvani, learned counsel representing Sri P.Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.3 in W.P.(PIL).No.12 of 2025 and Sri P.Sasidhar Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri R.S.Sumith Raj, learned counsel for respondent Nos.7 and 8 in W.P.(PIL).No.12 of 2025 and respondents Nos.1 and 2 in W.A.No.109 of 2025 and perused the record.

Chronology of litigations

7. W.A.No.109 of 2025 has been preferred by the State assailing the order of the learned Single Judge dated 21.11.2024 in W.P.No.27037 of 2014, whereby the learned Judge directed reconveyance of Acs.4.00 gts of the subject land to the original donors (respondents herein) on the premise that the specific public purpose for which the land was relinquished, i.e., for construction of a Mini Sports Stadium had not been fulfilled.

8. W.P.(PIL) No.12 of 2025 has been instituted by one Dr. Gurram Lakshminarsimha Reddy, a public-spirited citizen, seeking a writ of mandamus to restrain the State from reconveying the aforesaid Acs.4.00 Gts to the original donors, contending that the land, being Government property held in public trust and presently in use as a school playground and cannot be divested.

Compendium of facts

9. The centralized facts imperative for adjudication of the present case, are as follows:

i. That respondents in W.A.No.109 of 2025 (hereinafter referred to as “the donors”) were the original pattadars of land in Sy.Nos.858 to 861 of Mothkur Village.

ii. In the year 2005, at the instance of the local MLA and village elders, the donors voluntarily executed Form-C relinquishment deeds under Rule 16 of the Rules 1951, relinquishing an ex