Bhoodan land transfer in Maheshwaram: Telangana HC reopens case, remands matter to Metropolitan Magistrate

Hyderabad: Telangana High Court has reopened the case of the alleged illegal transfer of government Bhoodan land in Maheshwaram mandal.

A single-judge Bench of Justice Kalasikam Sujana remanded the matter to the Metropolitan Magistrate, setting aside an earlier order that had dismissed the complaint at the preliminary stage.

The court allowed a criminal revision petition and directed the trial court to reconsider the complaint afresh.

Complaint against former revenue secretary, others

The revision arises from allegations against Navin Mittal, former Principal Secretary to the Government (Revenue Department), along with the Tahsildar of Maheshwaram mandal, Mahmood Ali, Kondapally Sridhar Reddy, Managing Director of EIPL Constructions, and other private individuals.

Navin Mittal is presently serving as Principal Secretary to the Government in the Energy Department.

The complaint relates to the alleged transfer of over 50 acres of government Bhoodan land situated in Survey Nos. 181, 182, 194, and 195 of Nagaram village, Maheshwaram mandal, to private parties.

The petitioner, Dastagir Shareef of Mehdipatnam, alleged that the transfers took place during Mr. Mittal’s tenure as Principal Secretary and Authority of the Telangana Bhoodan Yagna Board.

Police declined FIR, Magistrate dismissed plea

According to the petitioner, the Maheshwaram police refused to register a First Information Report, stating that the issue was civil in nature. He then filed a private complaint before the XVII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy district, seeking directions to register a criminal case.

The Magistrate dismissed the complaint after examining the material placed on record, holding that the complainant appeared to be a third party without proprietary interest in the land and that possession of a sale deed alone did not establish ownership.

High Court examines Locus and Allegations

Aggrieved by the dismissal, the petitioner approached the High Court in revision. Counsel appearing for Mr. Mittal defended the Magistrate’s order, arguing that the police had rightly treated the matter as a civil dispute and that the complainant lacked locus standi to pursue criminal proceedings.

Prohibited Property Angle

A key aspect of the case concerns Survey No. 181, which had been notified as prohibited property under Section 22-A of the Stamps and Registration Act. The Bhoodan Yagna Board had also informed the court that about 50 acres in the said survey number formed part of the prohibited list.

Despite this, the petitioner alleges that transfers in favour of private individuals were effected during the relevant period.

Matter sent back for fresh consideration

After hearing both sides, the High Court held that the Magistrate’s order warranted reconsideration. Allowing the criminal revision petition, the court remanded the case to the Metropolitan Magistrate at Maheshwaram with a direction to examine the complaint afresh and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

The order effectively revives the criminal complaint and reopens judicial scrutiny into the alleged Bhoodan land transfers.