City
Epaper

'Pattadar' cannot be 'Owner' of government land: Court

By Lokmat English Desk | Updated: August 4, 2021 20:05 IST

Aurangabad, Aug 4:The Joint Civil Judge (senior division) P R Shinde today gave a verdict stating that 'Pattadar' ...

Open in App

Aurangabad, Aug 4:

The Joint Civil Judge (senior division) P R Shinde today gave a verdict stating that 'Pattadar' cannot be the 'Owner' of the government land. The decision was given by the court (on July 29) while disposing of the petition filed relating to the land adjoining the heritage Bibi ka Maqbara. The plaintiff had requested the court to prohibit action initiated against him.

Original petition

The plaintiff Jairaj Pande has stated that the land bearing city survey number (172, CTS No. 1635) is next to the Maqbara and since the Nizam period, they are ' Pattadars' and the land has been passed on to him by the ancestors. Hence he is the legal 'Pattedar' under the heirship. As a result, the court should issue an order prohibiting the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) from interfering in my possessed property and from taking action. To support his claim of 'Pattadar' he produced few documents written in Modi script in the court.

ASI's argument

The ASI's pleader Adv Ramdas Bhosale brought into the notice of the court that all the heritage monuments of Marathwada and the land adjoining to them were handed over to ASI in 1951. Later on, the Hyderabad Tenancy Act (Kul Kayda) was scrapped in 1971 and the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act (AMASR Act) came into existence. Accordingly, the name of ASI is registered in the P R Card (of Land Record Section) and inquiry register and also has ownership rights. There is no mention of the plaintiff as 'Pattadar'. Hence it is an encroachment. For the past 15 years, the defendant is operating the parking bay on the controversial land and had also constructed a protection wall upon it, but the plaintiff has not raised any objections, argued Adv Bhosale. After the hearing, the court gave the above verdict.

Pattedar is not a land-owner

Adv Bhosale brought to the notice of the court that as per The Telangana Land Revenue Act, the ' Pattadar' is a person responsible to pay land revenue and whose name is entered in the Government (revenue) records. He is ' Pattedar' (possessor) not the owner.

Tags: indiaAurangabadASIIndiUk-indiaRepublic of indiaIndia indiaGia india
Open in App

Related Stories

NationalBihar Horror: Man Kills Two Nephew and Nice Over Family Dispute in Aurangabad; Police Probe On

InternationalIranian President Calls for Constructive Role of Brics to Halt West Asia Conflict During Talks With PM Modi

LifestyleEid 2026 Date: When Will Saudi Arabia, UAE and India Celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr?

AurangabadReel Star ‘Lala’ Arrested for Murder of Retired Professor in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar; Body Buried in Forest

MaharashtraMaharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis Unfurls 200-Foot National Flag at Nagpur’s Kasturchand Park

Aurangabad Realted Stories

AurangabadRevenge-fueled rampage: Young man repeatedly stabbed in stomach

AurangabadUS-Iran War to Continue for Next 6 Months

AurangabadThree assault cases emerge from minor disputes

AurangabadVC to inaugurate rare books exhibition today

AurangabadCivic Chief flags concerns over incomplete hydraulic testing of 2,500-mm pipeline