HYDERABAD: The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of civil appeals challenging the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s 2003 judgment declaring the state government the owner of about 550 acres of land in Survey Nos. 100 and 101 of Miyapur village in Serilingampally mandal, Rangareddy district. The land is estimated to be worth around Rs 55,000 crore.
A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma held that the appellants had failed to establish valid title to the land and that fraudulent revenue entries had been used in attempts to claim government property.
The lead appeal, Civil Appeal No. 10699 of 2013, was filed by Bandari Ramchander and others against Maitri Cooperative Housing Society Ltd and others. The connected appeals involved rival claimants tracing their alleged rights to different predecessors, including descendants of the erstwhile Paigah estates.
Historical grants didn’t confer ownership: SC
The State of Telangana was the principal respondent opposing the claims.
One group claimed through Nawab Mohammad Khaisaruddin Khan, son of Rafiunnisa Begum, whose family had been granted rights over four villages, including Miyapur, under a 1929 firman issued by the Nizam. Another group claimed through Raheemunnisa Begum, wife of Abdul Salam, relying on revenue records that listed her as pattadar. A third group traced its claim to Raheemunnisa Begum, wife of Nawab Moin-ud-Dowla Bahadur, contending that the land formed part of her family’s personal property. The competing claims led to several land-grabbing cases and a series of appeals.
The dispute dates back to a 1912 survey, which classified 550 acres and 39 guntas in the two survey numbers as Sarkari poramboke. Following the abolition of jagirs in 1949, the jagir lands vested in the state. The Supreme Court held that the historical grants did not confer ownership of the disputed land and rejected the claims based on subsequent revenue entries, conveyance documents and adverse possession.
The appeals arose from the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s common judgment of April 16, 2003, which upheld the findings of the Special Court in three land-grabbing cases and overturned an earlier ruling favouring certain claimants. The Supreme Court found no grounds to interfere with the High Court’s judgment and dismissed all the appeals. It also dismissed the applications for impleadment and intervention and made no order as to costs.