Petitioner forges nod from non-existent state to claim 31 acres, HC dismisses plea
Hyderabad: In a big relief to HMDA, the Telangana High Court on Thursday dismissed the claims of private persons over a 31 acre land in Shamshabad.
A Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar, has pronounced its decision relating to the land measuring seven acres 31 guntas, 10 acres seven guntas and 12 acres 34 guntas under Survey Nos.725/21, 725/33 and 725/24 of Shamshabad village and mandal, Rangareddy district. This land is part of a vast extent of land measuring 216 acres 2 guntas, which was acquired by the state government for establishing a truck-terminal-cum-wholesale market.
Mohmmad Ahiya Qureshi, claiming rights over the said land, approached the High Court and questioned the alleged interference of HMDA in his possession of the said land.
He informed the court that his ancestors bought these land parcels from Paigah owners. HMDA, however, contended that the private persons are claiming rights over the said land with fabricated documents and fake court orders.
In the detailed explanation, Advocate General B.S. Prasad, representing HMDA, submitted to the court that the alleged documents and records pertaining to the sale certificate dated 27.01.1968 by the private person were fabricated, and as per the report submitted by the Registrar, the documents were not at all registered and the same were not found.
Further, the AG also submitted to the court that the property tax notices, municipal permission, revenue records, electricity bills, photographs, No Objection Certificate dated 20.04.2023 issued by Gram Panchayat, Shamshabad Mandal on the name of the private parties, House Tax receipts from 2007 and the House Construction permission appears to be forged and fabricated as they mention the existence of Telangana in 2007 itself whereas the state of Telangana was formed later in the year 2014.
Further, the private party has filed alleged orders of the High Court issued in 1998 that restrained HMDA from interfering in his properties. However, the Registry of the High Court found that the orders were not issued by the High Court and the mentioned case number was also not registered.
Considering all the facts, the court said that the private person did not come with clean hands to the court. Hence, the court was not inclined to give any relief to private person Mohmmad Ahiya Qureshi, in restraining the HMDA to the said land.
