Telangana HC upholds rights of protected tenants over 200 acres in Gachibowli

In his 156-page judgment, Justice CV Bhaskar Reddy criticised the sub-collector for passing a detailed order “within 24 hours despite being on sanctioned leave.”
Representative image
Representative image
Updated on
2 min read

HYDERABAD: Bringing closure to a decade-long dispute over a 200-acre tract of land in Gachibowli, the Telangana High Court has upheld a 2013 order of the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) recognising the ownership rights of protected tenants, while setting aside a contrary 2016 order issued by the sub-collector (joint collector).

The case, involving several survey numbers in Gachibowli village, pitted the descendants of protected tenants against subsequent purchasers, including members of the Diamond Hills Welfare Association. The dispute centred on the validity of tenancy rights under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950.

The RDO had in 2013 concluded that the petitioners’ predecessors were validly declared protected tenants and were entitled to ownership certificates. He also found no evidence of any lawful surrender of tenancy rights under Section 19 of the Act. However, in 2016, the sub-collector reversed that decision, stating that the tenancy law no longer applied since the land had been converted for residential use, prompting the tenants to approach the high court.

In his 156-page judgment, Justice CV Bhaskar Reddy criticised the sub-collector for passing a detailed order “within 24 hours despite being on sanctioned leave”, describing the speed of the decision as raising “serious doubts about the fairness and legality of the decision-making process.”

The court ruled that the sub-collector had exceeded his jurisdiction and interfered with findings already settled through judicial directions and factual determinations. It reaffirmed that the RDO was the competent authority under the Tenancy Act and had rightly recognised the ownership rights of the protected tenants.

The judgment also clarified that disputes over registered sale deeds between private parties fall under the jurisdiction of civil courts, not revenue authorities.

Quashing the sub-collector’s 2016 ruling, the high court reinstated the RDO’s 2013 order, and directed that the matter be treated as concluded, bringing an end to one of Hyderabad’s longest-running and high-value land disputes.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
Google Preferred source
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com