THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.8759 of 2004 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in taking over possession of the property of the petitioners bearing H.No.3-2-1/14 at Azamjahi Road, Kachiguda, Hyderabad unlawfully as arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. According to the petitioners, they are the sisters of late K.Eshwarlal, who was the sole, absolute and exclusive owner of Premises bearing Municipal No.3-2-1/14 comprising of one room with open land covered with compound wall totally admeasuring 300 sq.yards situated at Azamjahi Road, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. The said Eshwarlal purchased the above property from Smt.G.Padmamma and Smt.Shyamalamma under two registered sale deeds bearing Doc.No.2314/90 dated 13.8.1990 and Doc.No.2399/90 dated 22.3.1990 respectively. It appears, originally, the entire property comprising 1145 sq.yards was owned by Smt.Fatimunnisa Begum, which she has obtained the same under a Gift made by Shahzadi Zahanumunnisa Begum. During the lifetime of Fatimunnisa Begum, certain disputes arose and she filed civil suit, in which she was declared as owner and the said litigation attained finality in the Second Appeal before this Court. Thereafter, she had obtained permission and made constructions as early as in the year 1973. When the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad attempted to demolish the said structures, she had filed suit for injunction, which was ultimately decreed in her favour. Thereafter, subsequent alienation took place and late Eshwarlal acquired title. After Eshwarlal became owner of the said property, the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad again tried to interfere with his possession. Thus, he filed suit for injunction wherein the Municipal Corporation again alleged that the said land is a Government land. However, the trial Court, after full-fledge trial, decreed the suit in favour of late K.Eshwarlal. Eshwarlal died on 19.5.1999 intestate. As he was not married and petitioners being his sisters and class-II heirs under Hindu Succession Act in the absence of there being any Class-I heir, they became lawful heirs to the property of late Eshwarlal. However, some unknown persons claiming to be relatives of late Eshwarlal made a claim against the property and in the year 1999 filed a suit, which was dismissed by the trial Court. As the matter stood thus, respondent made all concerted attempts more than once to lay false claim that the property of late K.Eshwarlal inherited by petitioners was a Government land and could not succeed in substantiating such claim before the competent Civil Court, has apparently taken advantage of the situation and in the month of December, 2002, when the first petitioner went to the property, she noticed that there was a lock put on the gate with a seal and upon enquiry, she came to know about such seal having been put by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Himayathnagar mandal at the instructions and orders of respondent herein. Therefore, petitioners went to the office of respondent to make personal request, but none of their requests were attended to and ultimately, petitioners made a representation to the respondent on 3.9.2003 narrating all the facts at length and also requesting them to handover possession of property back to them. In spite of the said representation, the respondent has shown little inclination to even cause a reply to such representation. In fact, as early as in the year 1998, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Himayathnagar had addressed a letter to the respondent by way of submission of report vide L.R.No.A/482/98 dated 14.12.1998 wherein he had specifically stated that in view of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.32328 of 1997 filed by late K.Eshwarlal against the respondent and the Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records directing them to dispose of the representation of K.Eshwarlal who had filed the said writ petition for correction of T.S. record and also in view of perpetual injunction obtained by K.Eshwarlal against the Municipal Corporation, filing of land grabbing case as sought by respondent was reportedly found to be an inappropriate step. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Himayathnagar mandal further found that as K.Eshwarlal and his predecessors in title were in continuous and uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the property, recommended for regularizing the encroachment under G.O.Ms.No.508 dated 20.10.1995. Even after the death of Eshwarlal in the year 1999, the reports stated that the petitioners have been in continuous possession, therefore, the action on the part of the respondent in forcibly and unlawfully taking possession of the property of petitioners and putting seal and erecting board to that effect clearly amounts to deprivation of lawful rights of ownership and possession of petitioners in respect of property bearing H.No.3-2-1/14 situated at Azamjahi Road, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. This action on the part of the respondent without following due process of law, is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. Hence this writ petition. On behalf of respondent, the Tahsildar, Himayathnagar mandal, Hyderabad filed a detailed counter denying the allegations made by the petitioner. It is stated that during the years 1964 - 71, Town Survey was conducted in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 (for short ‘the Act’) by duly issuing notification under Section 6(1) of the said Act inviting all the persons to participate in the said survey. The land in question admeasuring 218 sq.mtrs. situated on the main road leading from Kachiguda Station to Chaderghat falls in T.S.No.1/P and 40/P, Ward No.191 of Lingampally village. Under Section 9(2) of the Act, notice was issued by the then Tahsildar and above said land was classified as Government land (GVM) and the Government is the registered holder. The final notification under Section 13 of the Act was published in Hyderabad District Gazette No.27 dated 2.4.1976. Thus, the entries in the T.S. records have become final and conclusive proof since neither the petitioners nor their predecessor filed any civil suit within three years as stipulated under Section 14 of the Act. Thus, the land in question is a Government land and this was proposed for construction of Government Upper Primary School, Kachiguda vide proceedings of the Collector, Hyderabad in No.C3/7242/97 dated 10.10.1997 and the vacant possession of the property was handed over to the then Project Officer on 13.10.1997 under a panchanama. It was further stated in the counter that late Eshwarlal S/o Mohanlal has filed an application for correction of name in Town Survey Land Records in respect of subject property under Board Standing Orders 34-B(10) and also filed Writ Petition No.32328/97 against the Collector, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad and the said writ petition was disposed of on 2.2.1998 with a direction to dispose of the petition in accordance with law. As per the said directions, the Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad has informed that the petitioner has illegally encroached the GVM road to an extent of 208 sq.mtrs. in and 10 sq.mtrs. in part of T.S.No.40, Block-M, Ward 190 of Lingampally village. As per T.S. records, both the T.S. numbers are recorded as GVM road. Eshwarlal expired on 19.5.1999 and during the enquiry, it was revealed that Eshwarlal was unmarried. On 6.1.2001, the subject property covered with compound wall to an extent of 218 sq.mtrs. was taken over possession and a board was erected stating that the LAND BELONG TO GOVERNMENT. Eshwarlal applied for regularization under G.O.Ms.No.508 and the said application was rejected as there is no dwelling unit existing on the site. Petitioners are claiming the property to be sisters of late K.Eshwarlal. The request of the petitioners for regularization under G.O.Ms.No.508 was rejected. In respect of the subject property, S.Manoj Kumar and S.Anand Kumar (cousins of late Eshwarlal) filed Writ Petition No.1153 of 2001 claiming the subject property and after the demise of Eshwarlal stating that they are the absolute owners of the said property. Apart from the writ petition, they have also filed suit in O.S.No.2801 of 2001 before the learned Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. In the said suit, they have also filed I.A.No.662 of 2001 seeking injunction and the same was dismissed on 22.6.2001. Questioning the same, they have filed C.M.A.No.214 of 2001 and the said CMA was also dismissed on 29.11.2002 and the main suit is pending in Civil Court. It is further stated in the counter that a drainage pipeline is passing through part of the subject property, hence it is also objectionable to consider for regularization of the said property since it is vacant. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. The learned counsel for petitioner strenuously contended that the premises bearing H.No.3-2-1/14 at Azamjahi Road, Kachiguda, Hyderabad is owned by the brother of petitioners namely Eshwarlal, who was unmarried and had no issues. After the death of Eshwarlal, petitioners are in possession of the property. The allegation that the respondents have taken over possession of the property on 13.10.1997 appears to be was only a paper possession and not actual possession of the property. This is clear from the report of the Tahsildar, Himayathnagar mandal at that point of time stating that in view of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.32328 of 1997 for correction of T.S. record and in view of perpetual injunction obtained by Eshwarlal against the Municipal Corporation. Further, commencement of Land Grabbing case as sought for by the respondents itself shows that the petitioners were found in possession of the property and further recommended for regularization under the scheme evolved in G.O.Ms.No.508 dated 20.10.1995. Therefore, the stand taken by the respondent that the petitioners were already evicted from the property is not consistent with the report submitted by the Tahsildar, Himayathnagar mandal. In this regard, the learned counsel for petitioner relied upon the decision in PONNA NARASIMHA REDDY v. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ[1], wherein it was held that in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court can order re-delivery of possession in the event that the Court coming to the conclusion that the petitioner was dispossessed illegally. Whereas the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent supported the order passed by the respondent and stated that the petitioners were dispossessed as early as in the year 1997 and since then the property is under the possession of Government and after the death of Eshwarlal, in fact one Manoj Kumar and Anand Kumar claimed that they are the absolute owners and possessors of the property and the sisters of Eshwarlal are nothing to do with the property. I have given my earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the material made available on record. The property bearing Municipal No.H.No.3-2-1/14 situated at Azamjahi Road, Kachiguda, Hyderabad in T.S.No.1, Block-M, Ward No.191 of Lingampally, Musheerabad mandal, present Himayathnagar mandal, Hyderabad admeasuring 300 sq.yards is not in dispute. According to the report of the Tahsildar, Himayathnagar mandal dated 14.12.1998 it is also not in dispute that 300 sq.yards of land comprising of above house was under the possession and enjoyment of Eshwarlal. It is a triangular piece of land with compound wall and one room and it is in the possession of Eshwarlal from the date of purchase. During the enquiry, it was revealed that the subject property was originally belonged to one Smt.Fathimunnisa Begum and she acquired the said property under Gift Deed No.728/25 Ishwandar 1338 Fasli from the Estate of Nikasu-Umra also known as Sahebzadi Zahandarunnisa Begum. The said land lady Smt.Fathimunnisa Begum obtained permission for construction of compound wall vide proceedings P.No.29/28/1973 and this property was also assessed by the Municipal Corporation and further the Corporation authorities have also allotted with House No.3-2-1/14 and she paid property taxes from 1973 onwards. The said Fathimmunisa Begum sold to an extent of 269 sq.yards in favour of G.Padma and G.Shyamala under registered sale deed Document No.3081/75 dated 17.2.1975 and in turn the said Padma and Shyamala sold the said property to Eshwarlal S/o late K.Mohanlal. Apart from the said property of 269 sq.yards, Eshwarlal has also purchased 31 sq.yards from Smt.Fathimunnisa Begum directly vide sale deed document No.2399/90 dated 22.3.1990. Thus, altogether, Eshwarlal purchased 300 sq.yards and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the property. Subsequently, the municipal authorities have cancelled the compound wall permission stating that the land in question belongs to A.P. Housing Board. Aggrieved by the same, Smt.Fathimunnisa Begum filed suit against M.C.H. for perpetual injunction vide O.S.No.2364 of 1973 and the said suit was decreed against M.C.H. directing not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property. Apart from the above, another land admeasuring 383 sq.yards was also acquired from Smt.Fathimunnisa Begum and compensation was paid to Smt.Fathimunnisa Begum. This all would show that Fathimunnisa Begum was the original owner and she has sold the property to Padma and Shyamala, who in turn sold to Eshwarlal and Eshwarlal has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. Under those circumstances, the impugned action of the respondent in forcibly taking over possession of the subject property and locking the same is arbitrary, illegal and deserves to be strongly deprecated. For all the above reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the respondent is directed to re-deliver possession of the property bearing H.No.3-2-1/14 at Azamjahi Road, Kachiguda, Hyderabad to the petitioners within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. In default, petitioners are entitled to occupy the said property without any further delay. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: .8.2009 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.8759 of 2004 .8.2009 [1] 2001(3) ALT 47