ORDER :

K.SARATH, J.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the entire material on record.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land to an extent of Ac.3-00 guntas in Sy.No.955/2, situated at Rudraram Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District, which was purchased through Registered Sale Deed bearing document No.8325 of 2011 dated 04.08.2011, from M/s.Orion Gems & Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., and one Mr.P.Dhanraj Kothari. After purchasing the same, the name of the petitioner got mutated in the revenue records vide proceedings No.B/8778/2011, dated 29.10.2011 and pattadar pass book as well as title deeds were also issued in the name of the petitioner. Originally, the State Government assigned the land in favour of Mrs.Mahaboob Bee, who is the mother of late Sepoy Md.Khaja (Slain Ex- Serviceman, who was killed during Pakistan War) under G.O.Ms.No.743, Revenue Department, dated 30.04.1963, to an extent of Ac.5-00 guntas in Sy.No.955 of Rudraram Village vide proceedings No.A5/374/72 dated 14.08.1972. Thereafter, the Assistant Director, Survey & Land Records, Sangareddy, issued a supplementary sethwar vide proceedings No.L7/833/72, by subdividing the land assigned as Ac.3-02 guntas in Sy.No.955/2 and Ac.1.38 guntas in Sy.No.955/3 of Rudraram Village, in favour of Mrs.Mahaboob Bee.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Mrs.Mahaboob Bee sold away the land to an extent of Ac.3-02 guntas in Sy.No.955/2 in favour of Mr. Mohd.Farooq and land to an extent of Ac.1-38 guntas in Sy.No.955/3 in favor of Mr.Shaik Muneer through registered Sale Deed dated 27.01.2005 vide document No.696 of 2005 and their names got mutated in the revenue records. After purchase of the subject land, the petitioner proposed to convert the subject land into a non-agricultural land and then he found that the subject land is under prohibitory properties list.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner submitted an application dated 06.01.2020 to the respondent No.2 requesting to issue No Objection Certificate with respect to petitioner’s land. After repeated requests, the respondent No.2 rejected the application made by the petitioner vide Endorsement No.E1/124/2020 dated 28.11.2020 on the ground that in the final patta certificate issued in favour of Mrs.Mahaboob Bee, it was mentioned that the subject land shall be heritable but not alienable.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order dated 28.11.2020 has been passed by the respondent authorities, even though the land was assigned to the mother of the ex-serviceman as per G.O.Ms.No.743, Revenue Department, dated 30.04.1963. The lands assigned to ex-servicemen are alienable/transferable after lapse of 10 years as per G.O.Ms.No.743, Revenue Department, dated 30.04.1963 and as per the clarification issued by the Government through G.O.Ms.No.1117, Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 11.11.1993. The original assignment of the subject land was done in the year, 1972 and after lapse of 33 years, in the year 2005, the alienation of the subject property was done and further, the respondent No.1 herein had issued a Memo No.24894/Assn.I(3)/2016 dated 16.11.2016, directing all the District Collectors to follow the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.1117, Revenue (Assignment-I) Department, dated 11.11.1993.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, basing on the reply affidavit, further submits that when the vendor of the petitioner applied for mutation of his name in the revenue records, the Tahsildar, Patancheru Mandal vide Lr.No.8/187/2008 dated 24.03.2008 stated that the land was assigned to Late Mahaboob Bee under Ex-Servicemen quota. Subsequently, basing on the said proceedings, the mutation in revenue record was granted in favour of the petitioner’s predecessors.

7. Learned couns