In a significant ruling by the Supreme Court of India, the case of Ramesh Parsram Malani vs. the Appellants shed light on a contentious land allotment dispute. The judgment provided clarity on the rights of pre-partition tenants in the Village Poppalguda, District Ranga Reddy. Stay tuned for more insights and details on this landmark legal battle.
Facts
- Civil Appeal No. 7477 of 2019 dismissed by the Court on 22 October, 2019.
- Central Government transferred land to the State Government.
- State Government can allot land for settlement of displaced persons.
- The appellants’ grievance is that their right to continue in possession has been jeopardized by the State issuing an auction notice in 2016.
- The alleged pre-partition tenants’ claim was not examined in the Court’s judgment of 2019.
- Appellants challenged land allotment to Ramesh Parsram Malani and claimed Patta as pre-partition tenants before the High Court.
- Miscellaneous applications were filed in Civil Appeals requesting interim directions to maintain possession over land in Poppalguda Village.
- Challenging the High Court’s order in certain Writ Petitions is the subject matter of Civil Appeals.
- The appellants claim to be pre-partition tenants on the land in Village Poppalguda, District Ranga Reddy.
Also Read: Interpretation of Mandatory Statutory Time Limits
Analysis
- The Court in Ramesh Parsram Malani’s case overturned the High Court’s decision.
- The High Court had previously ruled that transferring land to the State Government removes it from the compensation pool.
- The observations of this Court were made in the context of the finding recorded by the High Court
- The High Court’s finding stated that…
- The Court’s analysis was based on the finding mentioned above
- The Court’s observations were relevant to the context provided by the High Court
- The Court’s remarks were made with respect to the finding recorded by the High Court
- Appellants did not invoke writ jurisdiction or any other competent forum for redressal of their grievances related to land vesting
- Lack of action by appellants in seeking redressal through appropriate channels
- Failure to exhaust legal remedies before appealing
Decision
- All other appellants are free to seek redressal in other jurisdictions as per the law.
- All appeals have been disposed of.
- The order from February 12, 2016, by the High Court in Writ Petition Nos. 29274 of 2014 and 29436 of 2014 is overturned.
- The High Court is instructed to proceed with the writ petitions in accordance with the law.
Also Read: Challenging Legal Analysis in Acquittal Reversal
Case Title: INDU BAI Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA . (2020 INSC 63)
Case Number: C.A. No.-000483-000483 / 2020
