Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court in a significant ruling made it clear that the inclusion of any property in the prohibited list must follow Rules 238 to 241 under the Telangana Registration Rules, 2016 and mention under which clause of Section 22A such properties fall or are covered.
Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court also made it clear that the proceedings must be specifically shown on which day such property was included in the prohibited list and the procedure that was followed to do so.
The judge was ruling on a petition challenging the Karimnagar district collector’s orders cancelling the registration of 453 registered documents belonging to private persons whose land fell in Survey No.s 197 and 198 of Kothapalli mandal headquarters town.
The judge clarified the legal position governing the inclusion of properties in the category commonly referred to as “prohibited list” under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908, and the procedure prescribed under the Telangana Registration Rules, 2016.
The court noted that Section 22A of the Act, 1908 was inserted for the first time in 1999, and therefore authorities could not contend that any land parcel was on the prohibited list prior to that year.
The collector had cancelled the registration on May 12, 2025, on the ground that the land parcels were surplus land and were listed in prohibited list in the year 1997.
The court noted that several communications relied upon by the authorities did not clearly indicate the date on which the prohibited lists were prepared, or the stage at which the land holdings were included in them.
Justice Lakshman faulted the collector for unilaterally cancelling of sale deeds executed in favour petitioners by relying on Rule 243. The court stated that the power under the rule could only be exercised if the properties were included in the prohibited list prepared under Section 22A. If the inclusion of properties in the prohibited list itself was doubtfulm or where such prohibited list was prepared contrary to the applicable Rules, the power under Rule 243 cannot be exercised.
The court emphasised that inclusion of properties in the prohibited list must strictly adhere to the statutory scheme under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Telangana Registration Rules, 2016. Land whose ownership was disputed or pending adjudication could not be mechanically included under Clauses (a) to (d). Such land holdings may only be brought under Clause (e), and even then, registration could be prohibited solely upon issuance of a gazette notification.
HC Summons Officials Over Unpaid Dues
Hyderabad: Principal secretaries Sundeep Kumar Sultania (finance) and N. Sridhar (panchayat raj) have been directed to appear before the Telangana High Court on January 9 in a contempt case for not implementing orders. The High Court also issued contempt notices to four other officials of the Karimnagar panchayat raj department and and the pay and accounts office in the case.
Justice E.V. Venugopal directed the registrar of the High Court to issue Form-1 notice to the officials, stating that their appearance in person was mandatory. The judge summoned the officials following their non-compliance of court orders and for ingoring contempt notices issued earlier.
While dealing with a petition by K. Anand and Company, the High Court had earlier directed the government to pay arrears with regard to dues for works done in 2023-24. As the order was not complied with, a contempt case was filed.
D.L. Pandu, counsel for the contempt petitioners, informed the court that over eight hearings the government counsel had sought time but the government had neither filed counters nor compiled with the court orders. Upon this, the judge summoned the officials.