The Settlement Officer has jurisdiction to decide the question of ownership of ryoti lands under the Estates Abolition Act.

CHANDRA REDDY, CJ.

( 1 ) THE appeal and the writ petition involve a question as to the ownership of lands situated in R. S. Nos. 11 and 12 of Amrithalingampeta, an estate village in Eluru taluk, West Godavari district, and the parties are the same. The appellant in W. A. No. 159 of 1957 invoked the jurisdiction of this Court in W. P. No. 822 of 1956 for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents, the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Secretary, Public Works Department, the District Collector and the Additional Chief Engineer (Irrigation) not to give effect to the G. O. Ms. No. 1973, dated loth July, 1956, relating to Thallamudi pumping Scheme, in the following circumstances. The appellant is a ryot in the village in question. He claimed that he was entitled to a ryotwari patta in respect of what he called an integrated farm of an extent of 230 acres abutting the northern bank of the Krishna-Eluru canal. To the north of these lands, there is a large area of about 400 acres in which the ryots of Thallamudi village are interested. These ryots were making representations to Government for sanctioning a scheme whereby water could be pumped from the canal and carried by means of a channel running across the land covered by R. S. Nos. 11 and 12 to which the petitioner-appellant put forward title. It is seen from the relevant records that the scheme was dropped by the composite Madras Government in July, 1953- Further representations were made to the Government of Andhra for sanctioning the scheme. On the recommendation of the Additional Chief Engineer (Irrigation) and after the Settlement Officer found provisionally that the claim of the appellant to these lands was not established, the Government issued the impugned Government Order sanctioning the scheme for pumping installation for the year 1956-57 on a temporary basis subject to the usual conditions pending sanction of the installation on a permanent basis. It is to quash this order that the petition giving rise to W. A. No. 159 of 1957 was presented.

( 2 ) THIS petition was dismissed by our learned brother, Satyanarayana Raju, J. , mainly on the ground that as the title of the appellant to R. S. Nos. 11 and 12 in which the channel was dug by the ryots of Thallamudi village was not admitted but was in controversy, the appellant could not be granted any relief by the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and he could avail himself of the ordinary remedy to establish his rights, if any, in appropriate proceedings.

( 3 ) W. P. No. 958 of 1956 is the outcome of a petition filed by the District Collector, west Godavari, as the manager of the concerned estate before the Settlement Officer to decide the question whether the petitioner herein was entitled to a ryotwari patta for the lands covered by R. S. Nos. 11 and 12. This petition was instituted in the following circumstances. In order to facilitate irrigation of lands belonging to the ryots of Thallamudi village, water has to be pumped from the Eluru canal into a channel lying across the lands included in R. S. Nos. 11 and 12. There was an entry in the record of rights register to the effect that the drainage channel leading from the lands of Thallamudi to the Krishna canal was granted on patta by the zamindar to the owner of R. S. No. 2/1, namely, Sri B. V. Subbarao, the present petitioner. However, when the register of the village was prepared in the year 1932, these lands were registered as drainage channel porambokes. It appears that even in the earlier records, these lands were described similarly. They were not also included in patta nos. 5 and 6 and 32 issued to the petitioner or any other general public granted by the zamindar as could be seen from the 10-A account of the village for fasli 1360. Notwithstanding this, having regard to the entry in the record of rights register referred to above, the District authorities, whenever they were approached b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document