Back
Justice for an Octogenarian: AP High Court Slams ‘Arm-Twisting’ of Ex-Serviceman
In a stinging rebuke to the state's revenue administration, the has ordered the immediate removal of a five-acre land parcel belonging to an 80-year-old ex-serviceman from the state's ' ' list. Justice B. Krishna Mohan, presiding over the case of , lamented the " " employed by authorities to deny an aging veteran his
A Legacy of Bureaucratic Delays M. Appa Rao, a retired serviceman, was assigned five acres of land in Madhurawada village, Visakhapatnam, in . However, decades of legal struggle followed a of this assignment by the Tahsildar in . Although the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) set aside this cancellation in , finding no proof of violation of , the state consistently failed to restore the land’s status.
Government memorandums issued in and specifically directed the deletion of the property from the prohibited list—maintained under —yet these orders remained trapped in a cycle of bureaucratic inaction.
The Arguments: A Battle Over Legitimacy The petitioner, represented by the , argued that as an ex-serviceman, his entitlement is protected under G.O.Ms.No.279, which mandates the deletion of such lands from the prohibited list when no genuine dispute exists.
Conversely, the state authorities attempted to justify their inaction by pointing to pending litigation involving a parallel, rival claim by one Smt. K. Ramayamma. However, the court found this justification hollow. Extensive government inquiries had already concluded that the documents produced by the rival claimant were "fake and fabricated," leading to the initiation of criminal proceedings against her.
Legal Analysis: The Obligation of Fairness Justice B. Krishna Mohan highlighted a clear distinction between a and a fabricated one created to block administrative relief. The court observed that the existence of a fake claim does not extinguish the rights of a verified ex-serviceman. Furthermore, the court referenced a clarification by the , which reiterated that ex-servicemen are free to their assigned lands after ten years, provided the assignment's genuineness is established.
Key Observations The judgment serves as a stern reminder of the state’s obligation toward its citizens:
"It is a classic case of adopting arm twisting method by the respondent authorities concerned to deny and delay the relief sought by the petitioner by protracting the litigation on one count or the other and unless quietus is shown to this, justice will not be met and the individual would suffer an."
"The respondents ought to have seen that the petitioner is an Ex-Serviceman belonging to an octogenarian group and continues to receive the benefits till date, which itself sufficiently establishes his identity, existence and entitlement."
"The state cannot deliberately ignore the orders passed by the RDO... the government Memos... and the orders of this Court in W.P. No. 4291 of 2020 despite the fact that the petitioner’s patta is established."
The Final Verdict: A Two-Month Deadline The High Court has allowed the , directing the District Collector and the District Registrar to implement the government’s and mandates. Within two months, the authorities must: 1. Delete the land from the list under . 2. Update the revenue records in the name of the petitioner. 3. Grant all consequential relief, effectively restoring the veteran’s rights to his property.
This ruling acts as a critical precedent for veterans and citizens facing similar bureaucratic hurdles, asserting that administrative apathy cannot override established property rights and clear judicial findings.
Case Citation : & Ors. (2026 LiveLaw (AP) 104)
