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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 20110

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J
Naveen Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP/32217/2025



THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION No.32217 OF 2025

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

“…to pleased to issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 i.e., The Sub-Registrar, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District, in refusing to register and release the Sale Deed vide Pending Document i.e., P.No.46/2025 presented by the petitioner in respect of all that the Plot No.111, admeasuring 192 Sq.Yards., in Sy.Nos.725/1, situated at Huda Colony, Shamshabad Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, by way of issuing Intimation of Refusal No.15/2025 dated 23-04-2025, on the ground of that the survey numbers where the Petitioner’s property is situated are notified under as prohibited property under section 22-A of Registration Act, 1. As per the Prohibitory watch register of this office the above Sy.Nos.725/A/A and 725/9/A is covered under Prohibition Register Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908, Vide Notified Gazzette no.G.O.MS. No.786 dated 09/11/1999, 2.As per the Tahsildar Notification of Government Lands the above Sy.Nos.725/A/A and 725/9/A are classified as “Gairan” communicated by the Tahsildar Shamshabad, Vide Lr.No.B/230/2012, dated 09-03-2012 (copies enclosed) and 3. As per the District Collector Notification the above Sy.No.725 were notified as assigned under section 22-A (1) (a) vide Letter No.4985 of 2013/Shamshabad/Shamshabad, dated 26-09-2013 as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and also in violation of Registration Act, 1908, besides in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the respondent No.2 herein to register and release the Sale Deed vide Pending Document i.e., P.No.46/2025 presented by the petitioner in respect of all that the Plot No.111, admeasuring 192 Sq.Yards., in Sy.Nos.725/1, situated at Huda Colony, Shamshabad Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, without reference to the 1. As per the Prohibitory watch register of this office the above Sy.Nos.725/A/A and 725/9/A is covered under Prohibition Register Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908, Vide Notified Gazzette no.G.O.MS.No.786 dated

09/11/1999, 2. As per the Tahsildar Notification of Government Lands the above Sy.Nos.725/A/A and 725/9/A are classified as “Gairan” communicated by the Tahsildar Shamshabad, Vide Lr.No.B/230/2012, dated 09-03-2012 (copies enclosed) and 3. As per the District Collector Notification the above Sy.No.725 were notified as assigned under section 22-A (1) (a) vide Letter No.4985 of 2013/Shamshabad/Shamshabad, dated 26-09-2013 by setting aside the Intimation of Refusal No.15/2025 dated 23-04-2025 and to pass…”

2. Heard Mr. Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Dara Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Stamps & Registration for respondents.

3. Petitioner presented a document bearing No.46/2025 in respect of plot No.111, admeasuring 192 Sq.yards. in Sy.No.725/1 situated at Huda Colony, Shamshabad Village &

Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner invited the attention of this Court to refusal order of Sub-Registrar, Shamshabad, dated 23.04.2025 (Page No.21, P1). It is brought to the notice of this Court by learned counsel that G.O.Ms.No.786, dated 09.11.1999 has been struck down by this Court and that Tahsildar, Shamshabad, has notified that land in Sy.No.725 is classified as ‘Gairan’ vide Letter No.B/230/2012, dated 09.03.2012. In this aspect, it is submitted that Tahsildar is not the competent authority to issue letter. That it is the office of District Collector to communicate such letter. Hence, the letter is not in accordance with law. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the said letter is under challenge in this writ petition.

5. Learned counsel invited the attention of this Court to the orders passed by learned Single Judges of

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