Azizia Bee @ Shaik Mujeeb (D)Thr.Lrs. vs Govt.Of A.P..

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5441 OF 2015

AZIZIA BEE @ SHAIK MUJEEB (D) THR. LRS. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

GOVT.OF A.P. & ORS. Respondent(s)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5442-5456 OF 2015

DR. GRACE SATHYAVATHY SHASHIKANT & ORS. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

M/S ANDHRA PRABHA PUBLICATION & ORS. ETC. ETC. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

R.F. NARIMAN, J.

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5441 OF 2015:

1) In view of the judgment in Civil Appeal Nos.

5439-5440/2015 dated 09.08.2017, nothing survives in this

appeal.

2) The civil appeal is dismissed accordingly.

Signature Not Verified CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5442-5456 OF 2015: Digitally signed by R.NATARAJAN Date: 2017.08.18 17:13:10 IST Reason:

3) The controversy in the present appeals centers around a

piece of land ad-measuring 6205 sq. mts. in Survey No. 2

129/45/D in Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. The appellants before

this Court claim their title from a compromise decree dated

30.08.1961 followed by a Sale Deed dated 16.07.1962 to their

predecessors.

4) On 09.08.2017, this Court had rejected all appeals

concerning Survey No. 403 part in T.S. No.19/P, Block-K, Ward

No.12, situated at Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Shaikpet Village

and Mandal, Hyderabad. The present appeals are from an order

of the Division Bench of 16.03.2011 upsetting a single Judge

Bench order of 03.12.2008.

5) Mr. Dushyant A. Dave, learned Senior Counsel appearing on

behalf of the appellants has argued before us that,

unfortunately for him, despite the fact that qua his land

which had been the subject-matter of urban land ceiling

proceedings, all findings were in his favour, yet the Division

Bench has upset the single Judge order by somehow linking him

with persons who have been held by us as land grabbers in

Survey No. 403 part in T.S. No.19/P, Block-K, Ward No.12,

situated at Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Shaikpet Village and

Mandal, Hyderabad. In fact, according to him, in his case the

only question that really arose in the urban land ceiling

proceedings was as to whether one Mohd. Taqiuddin happened to

be a person against whom orders were passed under the Evacuee

Act. According to the learned Senior Counsel, once this was

concurrently rejected by both single Judge and Division Bench,

nothing remained in his case except to follow the directions

of the single Judge.

3

6) Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, learned Senior Counsel appearing

on behalf of the State, has very fairly taken the stand that

he is only concerned with Survey No. 403 part in T.S. No.19/P,

Block-K, Ward No.12, situated at Road No.12, Banjara Hills,

Shaikpet Village and Mandal, Hyderabad and not with Survey No.

129/45/D. According to the learned Senior Counsel, if the

appellants have lost possession at some point down the line,

this Court should refrain from going into the said aspect, but

may otherwise clarify the position.

7) Mr. V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf

of Andhra Prabha Publications, has also contended that the

allotment made in his favour by a Government Order dated

19.08.2005 should not be disturbed inasmuch as it has

reference only to Survey No. 403 part in T.S. No.19/P,

Block-K, Ward No.12, situated at Road No.12, Banjara Hills,

Shaikpet Village and Mandal, Hyderabad.

8) Having heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for all

the parties, we are of the view that the controversy now lies

in a very narrow compass. One thing is clear that the

appellants title to the land in Survey No. 129/45/D is clearly

traceable to a compromise decree of 30.08.1961 pursuant to

which a sale deed was entered into on 16.07.1962 in favour of

one Mercy Sona Bai Chellappa, who is the mother of the

appellants before us. Also by a memorandum dated 06.12.1967,

the Andhra Pradesh Government has recommended that

supplementary sethwars be issued in the revenue records in

respect of 41 cases, one of which comprises the land belonging 4

to the appellants.

9) It is not necessary to refer in detail to the urban land

ceiling proceedings, except to state that those proceedings

were taken by the Urban Land Ceiling Authorities, which

culminated in the repeal Act of 1999 being applied to the

lands belonging to the appellants. Somehow, in the course of

those proceedings, the name of another gentleman called Syed

Taqiuddin was brought up, which led to confusion and

allegations made against the appellants that their property

had already been dealt with in evacuee proceedings.

Ultimately, both the single Judge and the Division Bench have

held in favour of the appellants on this specific count and

have stated that the Survey No. owned by the appellants is not

concerned with any evacuee proceedings. This being the case,

the single Judge ultimately held:

From the discussion undertaken above, the inevitable conclusion that would emerge is that the lands covered by this batch of writ petitions except WP.No.6668 of 2006 are not liable for allotment to third parties including the Andhra Prabha Publications until and unless it is conclusively held by the competent forum that these lands belong to and vested in the State Government. As the respondents failed to come out with a definite stand as to whether the lands over which petitioners in these writ petitions have interest are included in the extent of 8,000 square metres of land allotted to the Andhra Prabha Publications or not, it is necessary in the interests of justice that the respondents 5

shall get the survey conducted by the competent authority. If it emerges in such survey that the land claimed by the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions except WP.No.6668 of 2006 forms part of the land allotted to the Andhra Prabha Publications, the same shall stand excluded from the land allotted to the said publications. After exclusion of such land, if any part of the land remains from out of the said extent of 8,000 square metres, the State Government shall be free to allot such remaining land to the Andhra Prabha Publications. The District Collector, Hyderabad shall cause the survey conducted in the presence of the representatives of the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions except WP.No.6668 of 2006 and communicate the survey result to them. If the petitioners feel aggrieved by such survey results, they shall be free to avail appropriate remedies available to them in law.

10) Unfortunately, the Division Bench did not keep the two

Survey Nos., namely Survey No. 403 part in T.S. No.19/P,

Block-K, Ward No.12, situated at Road No.12, Banjara Hills,

Shaikpet Village and Mandal, Hyderabad, and Survey No.

129/45/D, apart while deciding the appeal before it. Inasmuch

as confusion therefore arose as to the appellants, who do not

have any land in Survey No. 403 part in T.S. No.19/P, Block-K,

Ward No.12, situated at Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Shaikpet

Village and Mandal, Hyderabad, the Division Bench went on to

hold that all the appeals before it would be allowed and the

single Judge order was therefore set aside.

6 11) According to us, it is clear that the Division Bench is

in error in mixing up the two properties. We have been

informed by both Mr. Vaidyanathan and Mr. Giri, learned Senior

Counsel that possession has been given pursuant to the

Government Order dated 19.08.2005 to Andhra Prabha

Publications of 8000 sq. mts. entirely from Survey No. 403

part in T.S. No.19/P, Block-K, Ward No.12, situated at Road

No.12, Banjara Hills, Shaikpet Village and Mandal, Hyderabad.

12) This being the case, it is clear that the lands belonging

to the appellants contained in Survey No. 129/45/D have

nothing whatever to do with the lands comprised in Survey No.

403 part in T.S. No.19/P, Block-K, Ward No.12, situated at

Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Shaikpet Village and Mandal,

Hyderabad.

13) Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Division

Bench. The directions contained in the order of the single

Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 18353 of 2006 and 26478 of 2006

are restored.

14) The appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms.

.......................... J.

(ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)

.......................... J.

(SANJAY KISHAN KAUL) New Delhi;

August 16, 2017.