Hyderabad: The Supreme Court has upheld the ownership of nearly 600 acres in survey no. 81 of Kalavala Nagaram village in Karakagudem mandal of Bhadradri Kothagudem district as reserve forest land belonging to the Telangana forest department.The dispute dates back to a gazette notification issued on Feb 6, 1950, under the Hyderabad Forest Act, proposing the inclusion of the land in a reserve forest. The claimants argued that the land was patta land granted during the Nizam period between 1931 and 1933 Fasli and sought its exclusion from the proposed forest block.No title documents producedAccording to the forest department, the then Khammam joint collector rejected the claim on May 19, 2003, after the claimants failed to produce any original patta or primary title document. The order also recorded that the land was classified as “jungle” and was not in the claimants’ possession.The claimants challenged this before the high court. While a single judge initially ruled in their favour and termed the forest proceedings ultra vires, a division bench later set aside that order and upheld the state’s position. The matter then reached the Supreme Court through a civil appeal.Revenue records don’t confer titleThe Supreme Court, after examining the records, held that the claimants failed to establish ownership. It noted that reliance on revenue records such as Faisal Patti, Vasool Baqi and Pahanis was insufficient, as these are maintained for fiscal purposes and do not confer title. At best, such entries may indicate possession, the court observed.The court further noted that the land had consistently been recorded as “jungle” and that the revenue entries cited were not backed by valid patta or lawful mutation proceedings.It also held that the single judge had exceeded the scope of judicial review under Article 226 by effectively declaring title in a writ petition — a course deemed impermissible, especially in cases involving disputed facts.Upholding the division bench judgment and the 2003 order of the Khammam joint collector, the Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeal, ruling that the claimants failed to establish any legal right over the land.
