IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1948 OF 2019 THE 17th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 Between:

Diviti Narayana and 5 Others.

…Petitioners AND Hazrath Moghal Fakeer Dargah.

…Respondent

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 28 of A.P.(Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955, against the proceedings No.F3/222/2017, dated 15.04.2019, issued by the Joint Collector, Medak District.

2. Heard Sri Raj Kumar Rudra, learned counsel for the petitioners. None appears for the sole respondents.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the revision petitioners herein, who are the respondents before the Joint Collector, who are said to be holding the Occupancy Rights Certificate issued by the then Revenue Divisional Officer on 08.06.1994, who had considered the possession of the petitioners as on 01.11.1973 and also the relevant pahani for the year 1973-74, and granted ORC under Section 4 of Inams Abolition Act vide file No.M/5057/94 after conducting the enquiry as contemplated under provisions of the Inams Abolition Act. However, the said ORC was cancelled by the Joint Collector basing on the application made by the respondent herein vide order dated

15.04.2019.

4. Being aggrieved by the same, the present revision is filed on the ground that the learned Joint Collector cancelled the ORC granted in favour of the petitioners’ father after a lapse of about 25 years, without following the basic principles of law and in a mechanical manner.

5. It is further averred that the learned Joint Collector failed to record any finding as to whether the respondent falls under any of the five categories of landholders namely Inamdars, Kabize-e- Khadim, permanent tenants, protected tenants or non-protected tenants, and also failed to establish that the respondent was in possession of the subject land as on the date of vesting i.e., 01.11.1973, and simply passed the impugned proceedings without proper consideration.

6. Further, it is contended that the Joint Collector, without determining the issue in accordance with Sections 4 to 8 of the Act, which are essential for the purpose of issuance of occupancy rights, casually cancelled the ORC basing on a letter of the WAQF Board and Gazette Notification No.49-A, dated 06.12.2001, without any material on record, that too after a period of 25 years from the date of grant.

7. It is further contended that though the revision petitioners filed numerous documents in support of their case in respect of the possession of land, the learned Joint Collector erroneously opined that the land in question already notified in favour of Dargah, without there being any survey report or proper survey conducted under the provision of the WAQF Act, 1995. It is further contended that the learned Joint Collector ought to have appreciated the ORC granted on 08.06.1994 by the then Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak, after following the procedure contemplated under the Act and the alleged Gazette notification published on 06.12.2001 in the absence of the valid survey report after coming into force of the WAQF Act, 1995.

8. It is further contended that the Gazette notification issued by the State government is not in conformity with the Annexure prescribed under Rule 5 of the A.P.WAQF Rules, 2000 and such publication therefore cannot confer any right upon the WAQF board. Hence, the notification No.49-A, dated 06.12.2001 notifying the subject land as WAQF property has to be struck down and the order dated 15.04.2019 of the Joint Collector, Medak has to be set aside.

9. It is further averred that the petitioners’ are having the registered Qowl Nama (lease deed) in favour of the petitioner Nos.1 father by name Rajaiah vide Doc. No.1501/1966 dated 31.05.1966 since then ancestors of the petitioners are in physical possession and enjoyment of the land in Sy.No.351 admeasuring Ac.9-08 gts situated Janakampally Village, Medak Mandal and District.

10. It