Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : VENKATARAMA REDDY
P.Ramnamma - Appellant
Versus
Spl.Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad - Respondent
Decided On : 04-13-89
URBAN LAND (CEILING AND REGULATION) ACT, 1976 - SECTION 26 - NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BEFORE TRANSFER OF VACANT LANDS - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - NO ENQUIRY INTO TITLE CONTEMPLATED - OPTION TO PURCHASE BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY - TIME LIMIT - PRESUMPTION OF NO INTENTION TO PURCHASE - APPLICABILITY TO LAND WITHIN CEILING LIMIT AND NOT COVERED BY STATEMENT FILED UNDER SECTION 6.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a member of a cooperative housing society, sought permission under Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, to sell a plot of land. The competent authority rejected the permission, stating that the land was covered by a statement filed under Section 6 of the Act by a third party who had been declared a surplus holder.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the competent authority could not reject the permission under Section 26 on the ground that the land was covered by a statement filed by a third party. The court found that the petitioner owned land within the ceiling limit and that there was no statement filed by the petitioner under Section 6 of the Act in respect of which no notification was issued. Therefore, the court held that the competent authority could only exercise its option to purchase or not, and that no further enquiry with regard to the applicant's title or otherwise sought to be conveyed was contemplated under Section 26 of the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the competent authority can reject permission under Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, on the ground that the land is covered by a statement filed by a third party? 2. Whether the competent authority can make an enquiry into the title of the applicant who issued notice under Section 26?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, does not contemplate an enquiry into the title of the applicant who issued notice under Section 26. 2. The competent authority can only exercise its option to purchase or not, and no further enquiry with regard to the applicant's title or otherwise sought to be conveyed is contemplated under Section 26 of the Act.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to consider the notice issued by the writ petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Section 26 of the Act and pass appropriate orders.
( 1 ) TLIE petitioner herein is a member of Navodaya Co-operative House Building Society Ltd. , Hyderabad. The said Society entered into an agreement of sale on 10-12-1975 to purchase S. Nos. 97/1, 100 and 101, totally admeasuring Ac11-11 guntas at Ycllareddyguda, Golconda Taluk, hyderabad. Since the vendor did not execute the sale deed, the Society filed O. S. 1297/83 for specific performance of agreement of sale on the file of 11 Addl. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and the same was decreed on 8-12-1983. In pursuance ot the aforesaid decree a registered sale deed was executed on 26-8-1984 in favour of the above said Society. In turn the society executed a sale deed for Plot No. 2 on 30-4-1985 in favour of the petitioner.
( 2 ) THEREAFTER, as the petitioner wanted to sell that plot to a third person, she gave notice on 14-7-1988 under Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act of 1976. The respondents sent a Memo bearing no. E2/1816/26/88 to the petitioner stating that the notice filed under section 26 seeking permission for sale of an extent of 900 sq. yards in plot no. 2 S. No. 97/1, 100 and 101 situate at Yellareddyguda, could not be considered for want of previous clearance obtained, if any.
( 3 ) THIS writ petition is filed for issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant the permission under Section 26 of Act 33 of 1976 regarding plot No. 2 of the Navodaya Co-operative House building Society ltd ; covered by S. Nos. 97/1, 100 and 101 of Yellareddyguda, covered by lay out plan approved by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Vide Lr. 33/lay-out/8/84.
( 4 ) IT is comended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that when an application is made under Section 26, it is open to the respondents either to exercise its option to purchase such land on behalf of the State Government at a price calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Land acquisition Act or any other corresponding law but if such option is not exercise within 60 days from the date of the notice, it shall be presumed that there is no intention for the competent authority to purchase the land on bchalf of the State Government. In the instant case, the competent authority issued the proceedings dated 1-8-1988 stating that permission for sale could not be considered for want of previous clearance obtained if any.
( 5 ) IN the writ petition it was stated that the respondents are bound to accord permission under Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) act since the competent authority has no intention of exerecising option to purchase the land. Since the petitioner owns 900 Square yards equivalent to 756 metres which is not beyond the ceiling limit and as there is no declaration filed by the petitioner pending before the competent authority it is open to the authority to exercise the option or not to exercise the option under Section 26 of the Act. But the impugned order of the competent authority stating that permission of sale could not be considered for want of previous clearance obtained by the petitioner is not in accordance with the provisions of the Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) act.
( 6 ) IN the counter filed by the respondents it was stated that the lands bearing the said survey numbers are covered by the statement filed in form-1 under Section 6 (1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act by one sri M. Fasabatullah, which is registered as C. C. No. 6052/76 and that after due enquiry Sri M. Fasahatullah had been declared as surplus holder of vacant land/to an extent of 51,205. 67 Sq. Mtrs. finally on 19-6-1982 under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act. According to Section 5 (3) no person holding vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit before commencement of the Act shall transfer any such land and any such transfer made in contravention of this provision shall be deemed to be null and void. It was further stated t
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
