SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1978 Supreme(AP) 125

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : CHENNAKESAVA REDDY
Somasundarshan Goud - Appellant
Versus
District Collector, Hyderabad - Respondent
Decided On : 03-30-78

The Collector of one district has the jurisdiction to recover arrears of land revenue from a defaulter who has property in another district, and the Collector of one district can recover sums recoverable as arrears of land revenue by public officers other than the Collector or by local authorities in another district.

Headnote:

REVENUE RECOVERY ACT - SECTIONS 3 AND 5 - INTERPRETATION - COLLECTOR'S POWER TO RECOVER ARREARS OF LAND REVENUE - CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY COLLECTOR OF ONE DISTRICT TO COLLECTOR OF ANOTHER DISTRICT - VALIDITY.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the action of the Collector, Hyderabad, in initiating proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1864, to recover arrears of land revenue allegedly due to the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner contended that the Collector, Hyderabad, had no jurisdiction to collect the amount as he had never taken any license for selling toddy from the Excise Authorities in Maharashtra.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Collector, Hyderabad, had the jurisdiction to collect the amount as arrears of land revenue under Sections 3 and 5 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890. The court found that the conditions precedent for the applicability of Section 3 were fulfilled, namely, that there was an amount recoverable as an arrear of land revenue and that the amount was payable to the Collector. The court also found that Section 5 allowed the Collector of one district to recover sums recoverable as arrears of land revenue by public officers other than the Collector or by local authorities in another district.

Issues: Whether the Collector, Hyderabad, had the jurisdiction to collect the amount as arrears of land revenue under Sections 3 and 5 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Sections 3 and 5 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890, and found that they allowed the Collector of one district to recover arrears of land revenue from a defaulter who had property in another district. The court also found that the Collector of one district could recover sums recoverable as arrears of land revenue by public officers other than the Collector or by local authorities in another district.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition and held that the Collector, Hyderabad, had the jurisdiction to collect the amount as arrears of land revenue.

( 1 ) THE Collector, Bombay, by his letter No. LRB/mof/rev/1/74, dated 20-9-1975 requested the Collector, Hyderabad, to collect a sum of Rs. 42,300. 00 as arrears of land revenue from the petitioner. The Collector, Hyderabad, initiated proceedings, by his letter No. D2/20449/75, for the collection of the amount and instructed the revenue officials to recover the amount from the petitioner under the Revenue Recovery Act. After receipt of this proceeding, the Spl. Revenue Inspector issued Distraint Order under Section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Recovery Act 1984 and served it one the petitioner on 14-4-1977. It was stated in the Distraint Order that a sum of Rs. 42,300. 00 fell due from the petitioner towards toddy licence fees for the year 1973. The petitioner has now filed this writ petition alleging that he never took any licence for selling toddy from the Excise Authorities in Maharashtra, that the Collector, Hyderabad, was not entitled in law to invoke the proceedings of the Revenue Recovery Act 1864 for realising the arrears alleged to be due to the State of Maharashtra and that, therefore, the action initiated by the Collector, Hyderabad, for the collection of the amount is without jurisdiction. The petitioner has impleaded the District Collector, Hyderabad, and the Special Revenue Inspector, Himayatnagal, Hyderabad, as respondents to the writ petition.

( 2 ) IN the counter-affidavit it is stated that the writ petition filed without impleading the Collector of Maharashtra, who has issued the demand for the collection of the amount from the petitioner, is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone. It is also contended that a defaulter can be collected by a Collector of another District by virtue of the statutory provisions of Ss. 3 and 5 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890.

( 3 ) THE only question that is posed for consideration in this writ petition is whether the Collector, Hyderabad, can collect as arrears of land revenue an amount payable to the State of Maharashtra under the Revenue Recovery Act of Andhra Pradesh.

( 4 ) THE learned Government Pleader placed for the demand, reliance on the provisions of Ss. 3 and 5 of the Revenue Recovery Act. 1890. The learned counsel for the petitioner pleads that Ss. 3 and 5 have no application to the facts of this case and, therefore, the action of the Collector of Hyderabad is without jurisdiction. It is therefore necessary to read Sections 3 and 5 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890. "3. Recovery of public demands by enforcement of process in other districts than those in which they become payable:--- (1) Where an arrear of land-revenue, or a sum recoverable as an arrear of land-revenue is payable to a Collector by a defaulter being or having property in a district other than that in which the arrear accrued or the sum is payable, the Collector may send to the Collector of that other district a certificate in the form as nearly as may be of Schedule, stating---- (a) the name of the defaulter and such other particulars as may be necessary for his identification and (b) the amount payable by him and the account on which it is due. (2) The certificate shall be signed by the Collector making it (or by any officer to whom such Collector may, by order in writing, delegate his duty), and. save as otherwise provided by the this Act, shall be conclusive proof of the matters therein stated. (3) The Collector of the other district shall, on receiving the certificate, proceed to recover the amount stated therein as if it were an arrear of land-revenue which had accrued in his own district.

( 5 ) RECOVERY by Collectors of sums recoverable as arrear of revenue by other public officers or by local authorities:--- Where any sum is recoverable as an arrear of land-revenue by any public officer other than a Collector or by any local authority, the Collector of the district in which the office of that officer or authority is situate shall, on the request of the officer or




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top