HYDERABAD: In a rare case, the Telangana High Court canceled a land and a house in which it was held in 1965. The court also set aside such transactions and alienations after they had been made.
The Government confiscated the land of 11 acres 25 guntas in Survey no. 117 and 121 (old) and 124, 128/2 (new) along with house property bearing Door No. 1-42, Burugupally, Mominpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in 1958, from its owner under the Revenue Recovery Act, for which he defaulted arrears of rentals to a government of une 3,393 for a toddy shop.
The owner, K. Rama Goud, had a mortgaged toddy shop for the payment of rent as security for the agricultural land and house.
After taking over the land, the government had tried to take it in 1958 and 1964. The highest bidders had twice failed to credit the bid amount, which was Rs.2,725 at both times. Purchasing the properties, the government inviting Board Standing Order No. 45 purchased 10 for purchased agricultural land and `50 for house.
After that, the government owned a piece of land with 9 acres and 6 guntas in the land parcel of an ex-serviceman in 1979, who sold it to the GITAM University.
In 1995, the legal heirs of Rama Goud approached the High Court challenging the auction in 1965. They said they were minors at the time. They said the government had auctioned 14 acres and 58 guntas of their ancestral property, and Rama Goud had mortgaged only 11 acres and 25 guntas.
In the meantime, they also cleared the excise arrears of Rs.3,400 on March 30, 1996, when the excise department came up with the offer to write off the interest and penalties that the principal amount paid, and agreed to restore the agricultural land and house. to them. They submitted that they came to know about the “fraud” committed by the government only in 1995 and questioned the auction.
After a series of conflicting judgments, the writ petitions in the Telangana High Court in 2008, appeals were filed before a division bench. The High Court comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice K. Lakshman recently made the cancellation of auction and transactions.
The court said that it was a fraudulent act by the government authorities in a land of auctioning and thereafter. First of all, the governor did not issue the land parcel before the land owner. Though the auction was done in 1965, the record showed that the name of Rama Goud continued to grow in earnings records in both pattadar and possessor columns until 1973.
The bench followed the procedure followed by the government to hand over the properties for only `60. Moreover, it did not include the amount paid to the excise department for rent arrears of Rama Goud, who had died in the meanwhile. With that, the excise authorities are allowed to pay the legal heirs of Rama Goud. The Court also refuted the contentions of the Revenue Officer.
Now, the properties will be re-awarded to the legal heirs of Rama Goud.
