THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following

prayer:

“… to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the inaction of the respondent authorities in considering the representation dt. 18.10.2019 submitted for cancellation of the Sale Deed bearing Doc.No.3751/2019 dt.15/3/2019 executed by the respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in favour of the 7th respondent in respect of the land in Sy.No.14/AA/AA, admeasuring Ac.2-31 gts., situated a Kismathpur village, Gandipet Mandal, R.R. District, wherein the said property is mentioned in the List of the Prohibited property, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent authorities to cancel the above mentioned Doc.No.3751/2019 dt.15/3/2019, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the

case.”

2. Heard Ms. K. Jayasree, learned counsel petitioner, and Ms. D.Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and Mr. Pramod Maligi, learned

Standing Counsel for respondent No.7.

3. Petitioner is son of respondent No.4. It is averred that respondent No.4 is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.2-31 guntas situated at Kismathpur Village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, he was issued Pattadar Passbook bearing Khatha No.260.

4. It is averred that respondent No.4 acquired the subject property out of earning and funds of the joint family in the name of Naaram Bhoomi Reddy, petitioner’s paternal uncle, who filed a suit in O.S.No.283 of 1997 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, for partition and the said suit was allowed. Respondent No.4-father of petitioner filed A.S.No.128 of 2009 before this Court and an interim direction of stay of passing of the final decree proceedings until further orders was granted. It is the specific case of petitioner that suppressing the pendency of the legal proceedings, respondent No.4 is trying to dispose of the property to third parties. A sale deed bearing Doc.No.3751/2019, dated 15.03.2019 executed by respondent No.4, in collusion with respondent Nos.5 and 6, in favour of respondent No.7 in respect of the said land admeasuring Ac.2-31 guntas was registered.

5. Petitioner claims that he filed a representation dated 18.10.2019 for cancellation of sale deed dated 15.03.2019 but the said representation has not been disposed of by the respondent Nos.1 to 3. Hence, the writ petition is filed seeking direction to dispose of the said representation.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that respondent Nos.4 to 6 have a mala fide intention to sell the property. It is submitted that petitioner is son of respondent No.4, who has a legitimate share in the property and that his right is being denied. It is further pointed out that a public notice was issued in the newspaper cautioning the general public not to enter into the transaction/agreement/development agreement in respect of the property admeasuring Acs.2-31 guntas situated in Survey No.14/AA/AA. It is also pointed out that the subject property is in the prohibited properties list as per the records of the Registration and Stamps Department and as such the sale deed dated 15.03.2019 executed vide Document No.3751 of 2019 by respondent No.4, is an invalid document. Therefore, representation dated 18.10.2019 is made, but it has not been considered in spite of the property being placed in the prohibited list (as per Ex.P3).

7. Learned counsel for petitioner invited the attention of this Court to representation dated 18.10.2019 of the petitioner and submitted that inspite of the representation, dated 18.10.2019, the sale deed dated 15.03.2019, (Ex.P2 at page No.11 of the material papers annexed has not been cancelled).

8. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.7 contended that respondent Nos.4 to 6 entered