IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION NO.25175 OF 2016 DATE: 16.03.2026 Between:

M.Pandu Ranga Reddy s/o. M.Rami Reddy, R/o.H.No.64-1-100/15/C, Main Road, Gummadidal, Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District and two others.

…. Petitioners and The State of Telangana, Municipal Admn. & Urban Development Department, rep.by its Prl.Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad and eight others.

…. Respondents

ORDER:

The instant writ petition has been filed to declare the permission granted by the respondent No.4 in favour of the respondent No.9 vide permit No.49317/HO/WZ/Cir-4/2016, dated 11.04.2016 based upon allotment of land i.e., plot Nos.9 and 10 in Sy.No.180, situated at Kukatpally village, Balanagar Mandal Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District, in favor of respondent Nos.6 to 8, vide G.O.Ms.No.2062 dated 29.11.2005, by respondent No.2 in respect of the respondent Nos.6 to 8 along with the endorsement dated 04.01.2006 issued by the respondent No.3, as arbitrary, illegal contrary to settle principle of law, and consequently to set aside the same.

2. The brief facts of the case are that, one Mr. P.V.Uma Maheshwar Reddy purchased plot No.9 in Sy.No.180 from Bhagyanagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited, through registered sale deed vide document No.1668/1987 and further one Susheela Devi has purchased the plot No.10 in Sy.No.180 from Bhagyanagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited through registered sale deed vide y document No.1669/1987 and it is stated that the said Society after obtaining permission from the Urban Land Ceiling authorities, sold the land to various purchasers, including the said Sri P.V. Uma Maheshwar Reddy and Smt. Susheela Devi.

3. It is stated that Sri P.V.Uma Maheshwar Reddy, owner of plot No.9 expired on 28.01.2014 and his legal heirs sold the said plot No.9 to the petitioner No.1 and the petitioner No.3 vide registered sale deed document No.782/2016 and further, the owner of plot No.10 Susheela Devi expired on 09.06.2015 and her legal heirs sold the plot No.10 to the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 vide registered sale deed bearing document No.11079/2015, dated 30.11.2015. It is stated that since the date of purchase, the petitioners are in absolute ownership and possession of the same, and that petitioners came to know that respondent No.6 to 8 claimed to have purchased the said plot Nos.9 and 10 through unregistered document in the name and style of Agreement of Sale-cum-Irrevocable General Power of Attorney, dated 18.11.2000 and basing on the said agreement, and by playing fraud on the petitioners, they have obtained ULC proceedings under Section 23(4) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short, ‘ULC Act’) vide orders dated 04.01.2006, and thereafter a unregistered ratification deed was created by respondent Nos.6 to 8 ratifying the unregistered Agreement of Sale–cum-General Power of Attorney dated 18.11.2000 and that said ratification deed was signed by GPA holder of Smt. Susheela Devi and the said plots were never declared as excess land and, therefore, Section 23(4) of ULC Act is not applicable to the subject plots.

4. It is contended that the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.455 Revenue (U.C.I) Department, dated 29.07.2002 for allotment of excess land under Section 23 of the ULC Act to the persons, who are in possession through registered documents, and the framed guidelines for issuance of allotment of excess land and that the respondent Nos.6 to 8 under the guise of said G.O.Ms.No.455, dated 29.07.2002 had obtained proceedings under Section 23(4) of the ULC Act vide G.O.Ms.No.2062 Revenue (UC.II)

Department, dated 29.11.2005.

5. It is also stated that as per the said G.O.Ms.No.455 dated 29.07.2002, the applicant should be in possession of the excess land and the same has to be evidenced by a registered document and in the instant case, the respondent Nos.6 to 8 have filed the application basing on the unrestricted Agreement of Sale-cum