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

1977 Supreme(AP) 383

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : K.MADHAVA REDDY
B.Hanimireddy - Appellant
Versus
State OF A.P.through Special Tahsildar, Land Reforms Tribunal Kodangal. - Respondent
Decided On : 12-23-77

The Collector, under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1954, has exclusive jurisdiction to determine occupancy rights in respect of inam lands.

Headnote:

LAND REFORMS - ANDHRA PRADESH (TELANGANA AREA) ABOLITION OF INAMS ACT, 1954 - ANDHRA PRADESH LAND REFORMS (CEILING ON AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS) ACT, 1973 - JURISDICTION - INAM LANDS - DETERMINATION OF OCCUPANCY RIGHTS - COMPETENT AUTHORITY - TRIBUNAL UNDER CEILING ACT - NO JURISDICTION TO DECIDE OCCUPANCY RIGHTS IN RESPECT OF INAM LANDS - AUTHORITY UNDER INAMS ABOLITION ACT - EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner, claiming to be a kabiz-e-kadim, filed a declaration under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1954, seeking registration as an occupant of inam land. The inamdar, respondent 2, included the same land in his declaration under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, and surrendered it to the government. The Land Reforms Tribunal accepted the surrender without notice to the petitioner. The petitioner's application to the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal for permission to file an appeal was rejected.

Finding of the Court:

The Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal erred in holding that the petitioner was not a person interested and in refusing permission to file an appeal. The petitioner, as a kabiz-e-kadim, had a substantial interest in the land and was entitled to be heard before the Tribunal. The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to decide the question of occupancy rights in respect of inam lands, as that jurisdiction was exclusively vested in the Collector under the Inams Abolition Act.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner, as a kabiz-e-kadim, was a person interested in the land and entitled to be heard before the Land Reforms Tribunal? 2. Whether the Land Reforms Tribunal had jurisdiction to decide the question of occupancy rights in respect of inam lands?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Under the Inams Abolition Act, the Collector is the competent authority to decide who is entitled to be registered as an occupant of inam lands. This jurisdiction is exclusive, and no other authority, including the Tribunal under the Ceiling Act, can call it into question. 2. The Tribunal's decision to accept the surrender of the land without notice to the petitioner was erroneous, as the petitioner had a substantial interest in the matter and was entitled to be heard.

Final Decision: The Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal is directed to entertain the petitioner's appeal and dispose of his claim in light of the judgment.

K. MADHAVA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition by the declarants in C. C. No. 1052/75 on the file of the Land Reforms Tribunal, Kodangal is directed against the order of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Mahaboobnagar in I. A. No. 416/77 in L. R. A. No. (C. F. R.) No. 288/1977.

( 2 ) THE 2nd respondent herein is the Inamdar of the lands in question and has filed C. C. No. 3228/75. In his holding the 2nd respondent included an extent of Acs. 16-30 cents of inam lands covered by survey No. 90 of Nandaram village in Kodangal taluk, mahabubnagar District. The petitioner claims that he is entitled to be registered as occupant in respect of half of this land on the ground that he is a kabiz-e-kadim or as a tenant under the provisions of the andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1954, the 2nd respondent was declared to be holding 0. 4000 and odd standard holdings in excess of the ceiling area to which he was entitled and he was asked to surrender the excess. The petitioner s declaration is still pending adjudication. While so, the 2nd respondent purported to surrender Acs. 16-30 cents of land covered by s. No. 90. That order was passed without notice to the petitioner who has himself declared this land as part of his holding. The land reforms Tribunal, Kodanga! by its order dated December, 1976 in c. C. No. 3228/1975 purported to accept the surrender of other lands including Acs. 16-30 cents of land covered by S. No. 90 of Nandaram village and directed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayankhed to take possession of these lands under Sec. 11 of the Andhra Pradesh land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, As this order would result in dispossessing the petitioner who claims to hold the land and who also claims to be entitled as Kabiz-e-Kadim, he sought to prefer an appeal before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, maliabubnagar. As he was not eo nominee a party, he filed an application purporting to be under Rule 16 (7) of the Act for permission to file an appeal on the ground that the lands held by him are sought to be surrendered by the 2nd respondent and the Tribunal proceeded to accept the surrender without notice to him. The land reforms Appellate Tribunal was of the opinion that there was no basis for treating him as a party-interested and accordingly refused permission to the petitioner to file an appeal against the acceptance of the surrender of the lands by the 2nd respondent. This revision petition is directed against that order.

( 3 ) THE Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal has wholly misunderstood the scope of the enquiry under section 8 of the Act and the circumstances in which the surrender of any land could be accepted. The claim of the petitioner was that land bearing survey No. 90 of an extent of Acs. 16-30 cents of Nandaram Village being an inam land, the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of |nams Act. 1954 (Act VIII of 1955) apply and that he being a person answering the description of Kabiz~e-Kadim was entitled to be registered as an occupant. Under Sec. 3 (1) of the Inams Abolition Act the inams stand abolished and vest in the State with effect from the date of vesting. Section 3 (1) reads as follows:"3 (1) Notwithstanding any thing to the contrary contained in any usage, settlement, contract, grant sanad, order or other instrument, Act, regulation, rules or order having the force of law and notwithstanding any judgment decree or order of a Civil, Revenue or Atiyat Court, and with effect from the date of vesting, all Inams to which this Act is made applicable under Sub-Section (2) of Sec. I of this Act shall be deemed to have been abolished and shall vest in the State". The date of vesting is defined in section 2 (1) (b) as follows:"2 (1) (b) the expression date of vesting when used- (i) in sub-section (1), sub-section (2) with reference to clauses (a), (b), (c), (e) and (f) and sub-section (3) of sec. 3 and in sec. 34, means the date of publica




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