STOCK MARKET BSE NSE

HC Impleads Officials in Paigah Case

The High Court has, suo motu, impleaded principal secretary (revenue), Hyderabad district collector and the Jagir administrator of the state as party respondents to the petitions pending before it to pass a final decree on Paigah properties in Somajiguda in Hyderabad.

Published: 12th January 2014 08:17 AM  |   Last Updated: 12th January 2014 08:22 AM   |  A+A-

The High Court has, suo motu, impleaded principal secretary (revenue), Hyderabad district collector and the Jagir administrator of the state as party respondents to the petitions pending before it to pass a final decree on Paigah properties in Somajiguda in Hyderabad.

Justice MS Ramachandra Rao, while allowing an application by Syed Mujtaba Ali seeking to implead him as party to the petitions, ordered the registry to implead the above officials as parties to the litigation in larger public interest.

A division bench had earlier wondered whether the decree-holders would be entitled to all public roads, lanes, parks, bridges, ditches, rivers, streams, tanks, ponds, canals, lakes etc., which would otherwise vest in the government. It made the observation after it found that the decree-holders were claiming villages after villages in Ranga Reddy district and localities after localities in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad. Thus, apart from those of the state, there could be thousands of private properties in the villages which are included by the decree-holders in the schedule to the preliminary decree.

Following the observations by the bench, justice Ramachandra Rao felt that the claim in survey numbers 1 to 40 of Somajiguda in respect of which the application for final decree was filed, might conceivably include government properties, public roads, many private buildings (residential or commercial), lanes, parks, bridges, ditches, etc.

The judge also noticed that in the preliminary decree only ‘Somajiguda’ was mentioned at Item No.236 as a Maktha in Schedule ‘A’ and there was no mention of survey numbers or boundaries in it. Even in the application seeking passing of final decree, boundaries or extent of the land in Item No.236 are not given.



Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp