IMPORTANT POINTS
Moving court after 25 years is not entertainable.
Clerical error discussed.
Person directly aggrieved has locus standi to participate in the proceedings.

Headnote:(a) Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli – Acquisition in 1967-68 – APHB taking possession in 1968 – 1121.17 acres of land acquired in survey nos. 1009 and 1043 to 1065 – 11 acres, not identified, being claimant’s property, not acquired – Claimant, in 1993, claiming 11 acres to be in survey no. 1009 – Assistant Director reporting non-acquisition of 20.18 acres – Whether clerical error – APHB taking possession of entire survey no. 1009 – Respondents submitting claim u/s 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for 11 acres but without reference to any survey number – Moving court u/s 87 after 25 years – Held, question of correcting a ‘clerical error’ with reference to Section 87 does not arise. (Para 12, 15, 41, 42, 46)
       (b) Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Act – Section 22A – Acquisition of couple of thousand acres of land covering a few dozen survey numbers – Some error in describing the area of a particular survey number would be inconsequential given the overall acquisition and its purpose. (Para 40)
       Section 87 – If contention is that only 661.04 acres was acquired out of 687.03 acres in survey no. 1009, then it is not clerical error – Secondly respondents claiming difference of 11 acres but survey reporting it to be 20.18 acres – Such a discrepancy cannot be described as an accidental slip or a clerical mistake or a calculation error – Beyond scope of section 87. (Para 48, 53, 56)
       1980 (Supp.) SCC 627; (1981) 1 SCC 500; AIR 1966 SC 1047; (2016) 4 SCC 531 – Relied upon
       AIR 1981 SC 1922; AIR 1979 SC 1049 – Referred
       (c) Administration of justice – Delay and latches – No time limit specified – Action must be taken within reasonable time – Claim made after 25 years – Not entertainable. (Para 62)
       (2003) 4 SCC 488; (2015) 3 SCC 695; (2009) 6 SCC 791 – Relied upon
       (d) Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Act, 1956 – Section 22A – Land acquired for housing scheme – Third party rights created – 11 acres being sought to be taken away from it – Held, APHB had locus standi to participate in proceedings. (Para 63)
       (e) Administration of justice – Authorities, misdirected in law, reopening the factual issue after 25 years – Courts not precluded from interfering. (Para 64)
       Facts of the case:
       This case relates to the interpretation of Section 87 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli and the meaning of the expression ‘clerical error’. The further question is whether a ‘clerical error’ can be corrected “at any time” or only within a reasonable time.
       Finding of the Court:
       There was no clerical error in the measurement of Survey No.1009 for all intents and purposes and that in any event, the entire land in Survey No.1009 was acquired for the Housing Scheme of the APHB.
       Result: Appeals filed by the Telangana Housing Board allowed.

JUDGMENT

Madan B. Lokur, J.

Leave granted.

1. The question for our consideration relates to the interpretation of Section 87 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli and the meaning of the expression ‘clerical error’. The further question is whether a ‘clerical error’ can be corrected “at any time” or only within a reasonable time.

2. In our opinion, the correction sought to be made by the respondents is not a ‘clerical error’ and so the further question really does not arise. However, the expression “at any time’ cannot be interpreted to stretch over a period of 25 years, as in the present case.

Land Acquisition Proceedings

3. On 24th May, 1963 a notification was issued under the provisions of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Land Acquisition Act). The entire acquisition was of a few thousand acres comprising of dozens of survey numbers. Amongst others, the acquisition included survey nos. 1009, 1043 to 1065 comprising of 1110.07 acres in Kukatpally Village, Balanagar Mandal in Ranga Reddy District of Andhra Pradesh. The entire acquisition was for the purpose of a Housing Scheme of the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board (APHB) framed under Section 22-A of the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Act, 1956.

4. As is evident, the area was extremely large but it is recorded in paragraph 4 of the Land Acquisition Award that:

“The lands under acquisition were got surveyed by the Measuring Circle Inspector of this office and were got checked by the G.D. Inspector of Hyderabad District, and areas of the lands under Acquisition were approved by the Land Record Assistant. The Areas as approved after survey and check are adopted in this Award.”

5. As far as Survey No. 1009 is concerned an area of 661.04 acres was sought to be acquired. The notification does not indicate that only a part of Survey No. 1009 was sought to be acquired. There was no indication that 661.04 acres of land is only a part of the entire extent of Survey No.1009. In fact, as suggested in the Award, the entire Survey No. 1009 along with the entire survey nos. 1043 to 1065 (along with several dozen other survey numbers) were sought to be acquired by the said notification.

6. In paragraph 29 (b) of the Land Acquisition Award it is further stated:

“The Special Deputy Collector Patancheru has informed vide his Lr. No.B1/341/67 dated 6.8.67 that he has acquired 5 acres 21 guntas out of survey number 1009 measuring 666.25 acres of Kukatpally village. The area tallies on the spot hence an area 5 acres 21 guntas is deleted from the area of survey no.1009 of Kukatpally and award is being passed for the balance area of 661.64 acres out of survey number 1009.”

7. At this stage, we may mention that an area of 5.21 acres in Survey No. 1009 was earlier acquired for the Manjeera Water Works Department and hence 661.04 acres was sought to be acquired by the said notification.

8. The acquisition proceedings concluded without any objection having been raised by the respondents who were admittedly owners of the land. An Award was passed by the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Andhra Pradesh Housing Board, Hyderabad on 10th June, 1968 and Survey No. 1009 was described in the Award as “dry lands full of rocks unfit for cultivation and no cultivation is being done.”

9. On 24th June, 1968 the APHB took possession of all the acquired lands including entire survey nos. 1009 and 1043 to 1065.

10. Dissatisfied with the award of compensation, the respondents filed a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the claim petition it was stated that survey nos. 1009 and 1043 to 1065 comprise of 1121.17 acres. However, compensation was awarded only for 1104.26 acres (5.21 acres relating to Manjeera Water Works Department was not included in this calculation). Accordingly, it was stated that “11 acres and odd, they being the property of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 Supreme(SC) 433

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Madan B. Lokur, Deepak Gupta, JJ.Telangana Housing Board – Appellantversus Azamunnisa Begum (Died) Thru. Lrs. & Ors. – RespondentsCIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4632-4638 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.21856-21862 OF 2010) Decided On : 01-05-2018

IMPORTANT POINTSMoving court after 25 years is not entertainable.Clerical error discussed.Person directly aggrieved has locus standi to participate in the proceedings.

Cases Referred (9)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Madan B. Lokur, Deepak Gupta, JJ.
Telangana Housing Board – Appellant
versus
Azamunnisa Begum (Died) Thru. Lrs. & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4632-4638 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.21856-21862 OF 2010)
Decided On : 01-05-2018

IMPORTANT POINTS
Moving court after 25 years is not entertainable.
Clerical error discussed.
Person directly aggrieved has locus standi to participate in the proceedings.