HYDERABAD: In a long pending dispute over a land parcel of about 300 acres in Sulthanpally village, Shamshabad mandal in Ranga Reddy district between the state government and around 72 private persons, the government on Tuesday defended before the High Court that the land was vested with it and the claim of the private parties was not genuine.
The dispute over the land in Survey Nos. 123 to 126, 143 to 150, 152/A, 152/B, 153 and 154, totaling about 300 acres, has been pending before the High Court since 2005.
When the then government claimed that the property was under Jagir administration and was transferred to the government after the Jagir Abolition Act came into force. The government had issued a notice dated 21.6.2005 exercising the power U/s 166B of AP (TA) Land Revenue Act 1317 F and Section 9 of AP Record of Right in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1971.
However, challenging the said notices, V. Tulasiram, the then Member of Parliament and 65 others, contended that they purchased the above land in 1982 from the original pattadars Syed Shabuddin and Syed Karar Hyder Hussain and that they were in possession and enjoyment of the lands and their names were recorded as owners as per relevant entries in revenue records and they were issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in respect of the said lands.
A single judge bench of the High Court in 2009 quashed the notice on the ground that the same was patently without jurisdiction, apart from being barred by inordinate and unexplained lapses and delay and hence further enquiry could not be sustained.
Aggrieved by the order, the government filed an appeal in 2009, which has been pending and the matter was taken up for hearing on Tuesday. Arguments were advanced by advocate general B.S Prasad on behalf of the state government ,who brought to the notice of the court that the commutation amount of Rs 60,000 was paid to the Jagir as early as in 1951.
On account of which, the evidence was complete in all aspects, as the question of petitioners setting up title on the ground that they purchased the land in 1983 through registered sale deed was executed by incompetent persons and they had no right on the land, the advocate general submitted. The next hearing was adjourned to next week.
…
