Letter sent from Plot No. 338, Parvant Nagar, Borbanda, Hyderabad vs Collector & District Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2008 Supreme(AP) 716

Andhra Pradesh High Court
A. GOPAL REDDY and B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, JJ.
Letter sent from Plot No.338, Parvant Nagar, Borbanda, Hyderabad and others - Appellant
Vs.
Collector & District Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad, and others – Respondnets
W.P.Nos.14795/2005, 13227 to 13230 of 2005, 10206/2005 and 14021/2005
Decided on 2-9-2008.

Advocates Appeared:
M/s. V. Venkataramana, K.S. Murthy and M. Subba Reddy, Counsel for the Petitioners Special Government Pleader for the Respondents

Headnote:a) STATUTORY LAW :- Where statute contemplates doing a thing in a particular way, that shall be done in that particular way or not at all. Where insertion of a new section requires notification to be issued for application of the same, framing the rules there under does not suffice to make it applicable.
       b) AP. (T A.) Land Revenue Act 1317F - Sections 54,58 and 58A (Introduced by Amending Act 3 of 1308F) :- The restriction under Section 58-A of the Act on transfer of occupancy rights acquired under Section 54 of the act is not applicable, the notification regarding the village, tract or are or class of persons for which the section is applicable. Issuance of Loani Rules laying down such rules for the bar is not enough.
       c) AP. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 1977 - Sections 3 and 2:- Only assignments or pattas given to landless poor under the Act alone is subject to the restriction on the alienation, but not lands assigned on collection of market value.

       d) AP. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 1977 - Sections 4, 3 and 2 – Resumption of lands assigned merely based on the revenue records, without furnishing entire details like the nature of assignment, whether free of cost or for payment of market value, th reasons for the change in the revenue rords so as to enable the effected persons to file representation.
       e) AP. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Ad 1977 - Sections 3 and 4:- Change of revenue records by changing the nature of possession from patta to kafiji katta by the revenue authorities without giving notice to the affected persons and resuming those lands on the strength of those records is not permissible and hence quashed. However the officials given liberty to affect such change on following the conditions laid down under the law.
       f) AP. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 1977 -Section 4(1)(b):- In view of Section 4 of the Act as amended by Amendment Act No; 8 of 2007 the authorities have an obligation to restore the resumed to the original assignees or his legal heirs. However in view of the provision for appeal under the Act, RDO was directed to hear the filed as and when filed without raising plea of limitation.
       g) PRECEDENTS:- Applicability of judgment depends upon the similar set of fact and the same legal provision.

ORDER (Per A. Gopal Reddy, J.)

WP NO.14795/2005 is taken up writ petition on the basis of a letter addressed to the Honourable the Chief Justice on 5-7-2005 along with newspaper cutting, under the caption "Rs.50 thousand crbres worth of 15000 acres of assigned land grabbed by real estate persons, industrialists including the Member of Parliament from Hyderabad under benami names on the basis of forged documents, which should be remained with the assignees/landless poor persons in whose favour lands were initially assigned."

2. The matter initially appeared on 16-8-2005. The Government Pleader who took time filed counter affidavit on behalf of the first respondent-Collector, Ranga Reddy District admitting that "there is some truth in the allegation that certain assigned lands were purchased by some real estate persons, industrialists." In the backdrop of filing the counter affidavit, this court called upon the respondents to furnish detailed information. Pursuant to the directions of this court, the Government Pleader submitted a document, titling "Details of POT (Prohibition of Transfer) Cases in Ranga Reddy District" purporting to contain the details of the various assigned lands in some 34 Mandals of Ranga Reddy District and also furnished the details of the illegal transfers as assessed by the respondents in the District. The documents furnished by the Government Pleader disclose that a few prominent personalities are alleged to have involved in such illegal purchase and an extent of about AC.8716-39 guntas is the subject matter of alleged illegal transfers. The same is the subject matter of challenge in the other writ petitions. Therefore, this court by order dt. 5-10-2005 directed to list all the matters together for hearing.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 17-3-2008, the cases were categorized into 4 categories, namely, (1) Sec. 4 of the A. P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 (for short "the Act NO.9 of 1977); (2) Sec. 3(1) of the Act No.9/1977; (3) Sec. 4(1) of the Act NO.9/1977 and (4) A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

4. Four writ petitions ie., WP Nos.13227/ 2005; 13228/2005; 13229/2005 and 13230 of 2005 arise out of the orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners in the above writ petitions have obtained a Rule from this court calling upon the respondents to show cause why a writ in the nature of Certiorari under Art. 226 of the Constitution should not be issued quashing the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy District in proceedings No.D/1229/ 2003 dt. 30-4-2005 and consequently setting aside the common order passed by the Deputy Collector and Mandai Revenue Officer, Ranga Reddy District in Proceedings NO.B/1139/1998 dt. 15-2-2003 resuming the land in S.Nos.37 and 38/1 of Khanamet village, Serilingampally Mandai, Ranga Reddy District, if necessary, by declaring that the petitioners have pattadari rights over the suit land as purchasers.

5. WP NO.10206/2005 is filed by two persons for restoration of the land admeasuring AC.9-38 cents situate in Khanamet village in their favour under Sec. 4 of the Act 9 of 1977 and for a consequential direction to the Mandai Revenue Officer to deliver the said land to them.

6. W.P. NO.14021/2005 is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus declaring that changing the revenue records pertaining to the land in S.No.177/6 ad-measuring AC.3-25 guntas situate at Aziznagar village, Moinabad Mandai, Ranga Reddy District from patta land to laoni land and granting patta in favour of respondents 5 and 6 as arbitrary and illegal and same is in violation of principles of natural justice.

7. Since the point that arises for consideration, namely, "Whether lands which were granted patta under Laoni Rules, 1950 (for short "the Laoni Rules") can be resumed under the provisions of the Act NO.9/1977 treating them as assigned lands", in all the writ petitions, they were heard

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2008 Supreme(AP) 716

Cases Referred (1)