Back
2002 Supreme(AP) 459
Andhra Pradesh High Court
G.Ramanaiah, Ex-Serviceman - Appellant
Versus
Deputy Collector and Magistrate - Respondent
Decided On : 03-27-02
Headnote:
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 14 - A. P. Assigned Lands Act, 1977 - Section 3 - Void abinitio – Restore possession of assigned land- Petitioner is an ex-serviceman - He filed writ petition, questioning proceedings of 3rd respondent dated insofar as same is against the petitioner as illegal arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and Art. 14 of Constitution of India and seeks mandamus directing respondents to restore the possession of assigned land of 5 acres - Petitioner paid land revenue upto and in year 1978 when he was staying in assam, he paid the land revenue by sending the D. D. datted - D. D. was returned by proceedings dated directing petitioner to pay the land revenue directly to the concerned Village - Thereafter, petitioner on availing leave, visited the village in order to pay land revenue and the Village informed that the 5 acres of land in was already reassigned to one who was a Village and who is a rich landlord - Respondents have violated the principles of natural justice and played fraud on petitioner in order to give undue benefit to the Village Minsiff of and hence even assuming that there was a re-assignment of land same is void abinitio and petitioner deemed to have been holding the said valid patta and he is entitled for restoration of possession of assigned land under the Original assignment patta - Petitioner, after knowing the mischief and fraud meted out to him, immediately approached the then District collector, on and explained his grievance and also met the rdo Cuddapah and apprised the facts - On petitioner represented the issue to the District Collector RDO and Tahsildar - In pursuance of his representations then District Collector issued a notice dated directing rdo of Cuddapah to inquire into and call for the report from the Tahsildar with regard to assignment and reassignment of land of 5 acres and directed to take necessary action on the representation - In pursuance of instructions of District Collector rdo initiated inquiry and directed the village Officers to appear before him with all relevant records – Held, Petitioner contends that the entire action of the respondents is vitiated on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the cancellation of assignment by the then Tahsildar was not preceded by any notice and opportunity and in the counter-affidavit, reason assigned for cancellation is that during the period petitioner has not brought land under cultivation - Condition of grant stipulates that he has to bring land under cultivation within three years and an inference has to be drawn that the petitioner has cultivated the land within required period stipulated in the DKT Patta - Village in turn sold away the land for a consideration and MRO rightly held that the sale effected by the Village Munsiff for a consideration of Rs. 1 lakh for nonagricultural purposes is in the teeth of sections 3 and 4 of the Act and said transaction is void and rightly resumed the land in favour of the Government - Crucial question that arises for consideration is that while resuming the land in favour of Government, MRO ought to have noticed that original cancellation of assignment in favour of petitioner by the then Tahsildar is vitiated on two counts indicated supra - He ought to have allotted the said land to petitioner but instead he resumed land and given possession to the Government have considered above aspects and the cancellation of assignment by then Tahsildar in is violative of principles of natural justice apart from the infirmity that petitioner has not violated the condition namely condition not bringing land under cultivation within the stipulated period of three years inasmuch as there is no whisper in the counter with regard to that aspect - Writ petition is allowed
( 1 ) THE petitioner is an ex-serviceman. He filed the writ petition, questioning the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 23-12-1989, insofar as the same is against the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and Art. 14 of the Constitution of India, and seeks mandamus directing the respondents to restore the possession of the assigned land of 5 acres in S. No. 123/1 of thollagangannapalli village, Vallur Mandal, cuddapah District to the petitioner, who was the original assignee.
( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner is that he joined the Indian Air Force on 18-10-1963 as soldier and after serving for 18 years he retired as Sergeant on 18-10-1981. While he was in service, the then Tahsildar of cuddapah in his proceedings BI/dkt/227/ mp/74 dated 25-11-1966, granted D. K. Patta in favour of the petitioner assigning 5 acres of land and he has been cultivating the assigned land by raising Jower crops etc. The petitioner paid land revenue upto 1976 and in the year 1978 when he was staying in assam, he paid the land revenue by sending the D. D. dated 4-12-1978 to the Tahsildar, cuddapah. The said D. D. was returned by proceedings dated 1-1-1979 directing the petitioner to pay the land revenue directly to the concerned Village Munsiff. Thereafter, the petitioner on availing leave, visited the village Munsiff in order to pay the land revenue and the Village Munsif informed that the 5 acres of land in S. No. 123/1 was already reassigned to one Sri Padmanahbha reddy, who was a Village Munsiff of chennuru and who is a rich landlord. The petitioner submits that his assignment was never cancelled nor any notice was issued to him before reassigning the land to the village Munsiff. The respondents have violated the principles of natural justice and played fraud on the petitioner in order to give undue benefit to the Village Minsiff of chennuru and hence even assuming that there was a re-assignment of land, the same is void abinitio and the petitioner deemed to have been holding the said valid patta and he is entitled for restoration of possession of the assigned land under the Original assignment patta dated 25-11-1966.
( 3 ) THE petitioner, after knowing the mischief and fraud meted out to him, immediately approached the then District collector, Cuddapah on 16-5-1979 and explained his grievance and also met the rdo, Cuddapah, and apprised the facts. On 1-1-1982, the petitioner represented the issue to the District Collector, RDO, and Tahsildar. In pursuance of his representations, the then District Collector issued a notice dated 17-7-1982 directing the rdo of Cuddapah to inquire into and call for the report from the Tahsildar with regard to assignment and reassignment of land of 5 acres and directed to take necessary action on the representation. In pursuance of the instructions of the District Collector, the rdo initiated inquiry and directed the village Officers to appear before him with all relevant records. In furtherance of inquiry, the RDO issued notices on 11-9-1982, 8-10-1982, and 24-10-1982 respectively, fixing the different dates of inquiry. As the said enquiry was in progress, at that stage, there was a reorganization of villages and the Mandal system has been introduced by the State Government and as a consequence of which the petitioner s file has been made over to the MRO, Valluru mandal in the new pattern, and the petitioner moved the District Collector by representations dated 4-6-1986 and 22-7-1987. With the result, the MRO, Valluru was directed to complete the enquiry. The mro issued notices on 12-8-1986 and 31-8-1988 directing both the parties and the concerned Village Officers to appear before him with all the records on 20-8-1986 and 12r9-1988 respectively.
( 4 ) FINALLY, the enquiry was completed vide proceedings dated 23-12-1989 cancelling the re-assignment of land in favour of Padmanabha Reddy, the then village Munsif of Chennuru as it was found illegal and
