Hyderabad: The Telangana high court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a group of landholders seeking ownership rights over 42 acres of disputed agricultural land and the Sri Ramalingeswara Swamy temple located on it in Chinaravalpalle village of Bibinagar mandal in Yadadri Bhuvanagiri district, holding that questions relating to land title must be adjudicated by a competent civil court.Justice GM Mohiuddin ruled that disputes involving competing claims of ownership cannot be decided by revenue authorities or in writ proceedings, particularly when they require examination of oral and documentary evidence.The petitioners had challenged a June 29, 2021, order of the Yadadri Bhuvanagiri special tribunal, which declined to alter revenue records in their favour. The court noted that the petitioners approached the high court only in 2023, nearly two years after the tribunal’s order was passed.Finding no satisfactory explanation for the delay, Justice Mohiuddin observed, “The principle of delay and laches weighed heavily against exercising discretionary writ jurisdiction, particularly since high court had previously declined to stay temple lease auctions on the same property in earlier litigation.”Tracing their claim to their grandfathers, the petitioners contended that Khasra pahanis from 1954-58 recorded their predecessors as the original pattadars. They argued that their families had remained in continuous possession of the land, paid land revenue, maintained the temple and secured valid land ceiling clearances from the Land Reforms Tribunal.The petitioners also relied on reports submitted by the tahsildar and district collector, which stated that the lands were not included in the endowments register or the list of prohibited properties.Opposing the plea, the revenue and endowments departments maintained that the land constituted service inam property endowed for the maintenance and service of Ramalingeswara Swamy temple. Assistant govt pleader L Ravinder submitted that revenue records from 1958-59 onwards consistently reflected the temple as the pattadar, while the petitioners were shown only as possessors or enjoyers without any independent title.Bhukiya Mangilal Naik, govt pleader for the endowments department, further argued that under the AP (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955, and the Endowments Act, 1987, religious institutions enjoy exclusive occupancy rights over endowed inam lands, overriding inconsistent private claims in revenue records.Refusing to interfere with the special tribunal’s order, the high court held that the dispute involved complex and competing questions of title that could not be conclusively determined in writ proceedings based on affidavits and departmental reports. The parties were left to pursue their claims before an appropriate civil court.
Source link
