HC asks Centre to explain action on registration of non-agricultural land on Dharani

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Friday sought to know what the Union Cabinet Sub-Committee has done on the issue of registration of non-agricultural lands through the Dharani portal.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy was dealing with a batch of seven petitions (two PILs and five writ petitions) that challenged the registration of lands through the Dharani Portal and insistence on furnishing personal details, the Aadhar number of the property owners and their family members, all these to be uploaded on Dharani.

CJ Hima Kohli, during the course of adjudication, made it clear that numerous petitions on same issue will not be entertained. Hence, the court disposed of five writ petitions out of the batch of eight, and kept two PILs aside for further adjudication.

Advocate-General B.S. Prasad informed the court that the issue raised by petitioners before the court is under examination before the government and registration of non–agricultural lands has been taken up as per the old practice.

“The issues raised by the petitioners were under consideration of a Cabinet Sub-Committee studying issues of registration of non-agricultural lands,” the A-G said and sought time to get further instructions on this issue from the government.

Considering the A-G’s request , the court adjourned the case to June 21.

However, the court has extended the interim orders that had restrained the government from insisting on furnishing personal details of non- agricultural property owners and uploading of such details on Dharani portal.

The court refused to issue any order on another issue related to operation of Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act-2020, in which the petitioner argued that the act was not applicable to the lands falling in the 5th Schedule areas of Telangana state.

Vasudha Nagraj, counsel for petitioner, told the court there were chances of transfer of land to non-tribals following implementation of the new act. She said that for two months, the government had not been responding to a request to issue restrain orders to stop operation of the act in tribal areas.

However, since the petitioner failed to bring to the notice of the court even one single instance of violation of registrations in rribal areas till now, the court said it was not inclined to issue directions.

Meanwhile, the bench directed the Union government to file counter on the contentions raised in the PIL.