Back
2011 Supreme(AP) 908
High Court of Andhra Pradesh
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
State Of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad
Versus
V. Subba Rao & Others
W.P.Nos.15679 of 2005, 15697, 16120 & 26448 of 2005
Decided on : 29-10-2011
For the Petitioner:The Advocate General.
For the Respondents:M/s. M.V. Durga Prasad, M.V.S. Suresh Kumar, P. Sri Raghuram, P. Rajagopal Rao, P. Vasudeva Reddy, P. Roy Reddy, Advocates, R1, R2 & R4, R5, G.P. for Revenue.
Headnote:A) A.P. LAND GRABBING (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1982, Sections 7-A and 8 - Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, Sections 7, 7-A and 8:- Writ petition filed by the Government against the order of Land Grabbing Tribunal dismissing its claim for a declaration that the respondent is a land grabber is dismissed because the finding of the Tribunal that the Government is not vested with the absolute title in evacuee property as claimed by it, nor did it could prove that the land in question was in fact an evacuee property and also on the ground that the State Government was well aware of the title of the respondent being recorded in the Revenue Records and the Town Survey Records. (Para 21)
B) ADMINISTRATION OF EVACUEE PROPERTY ACT, 1950, Sections 7, 7-A and 8:-Scope of the provisions is explained. Notwithstanding a declaration of a property as evacuee property, the evacuee continues to be the owner of the property and the vesting of the property thereof in the custodian would only mean that the custodian has stepped in his shoes as statutory agent or manager for due administration, preservation and management of the property. It is definitely meant that he lawfully takes possession of the property and he continues to be in the lawful possession of it till it is handed over to the owner of the property. (Para 19 and 14)
(V. Eswaraiah)
1. Since these writ petitions have been filed against common order dated 10.3.2004 passed by the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, (for short referred to as the Special Court) in L.G.C Nos. 17 and 114 of 1999 and 28 of 2002 (for short ‘the common order’) and common questions arise for consideration, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The first three writ petitions i.e., 15679, 15697 and 16120 of 2005 are filed by the State, having aggrieved by the common orders dismissing L.G.C. Nos. 17 and 114 of 1999 filed by the State and in allowing L.G.C No. 28 of 2002, whereas, W.P. No. 26448 of 2005 was filed by the respondents 2 to 9 in L.G.C. No. 17 of 1999, seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the observations of the Special Court made in the common order with reference to L.G. C No. 17 of 1999 to the effect that the respondents 1 to 8 therein, whereas the first of them is the first applicant in LGC.No.28 of 2002 got only possessory title and the observations made with regard to Ex.C.8 sale deed, as illegal and contrary to law.
3. The State through its Mandal Revenue Officer, Shaikpet village, Hyderabad filed L.G.C. No. 17 of 1999 for declaring the respondents therein who are the petitioners in W.P.No.26448 of 2005 as land grabbers of the property scheduled therein and an extent of 5546 sq.mtrs. (6633 sq.yards) situated in T.S. No. 8/1, Block “B”, Ward No. 10 correlated to Survey NO. 129 /67 of Shaikpet village, which happened to be an Evacuee Property, and evict them therefrom and deliver the vacant possession of the property to the State and further to punish them under Sections 3 and 4 of Act. The boundaries of the property are given as under;
EAST: T.S. No. 8/1, Block “B”, Ward No. 10
WEST: T.S. No. 8/1, Block “B”, Ward No. 10
NORTH: Yellareddyguda sivar
SOUTH: T.S. No. 8/1, Block “B”, Ward No.10 (Road)
4. Further, the State through its Mandal Revenue Officer, Shaikpet village, Hyderabad filed L.G.C. No. 114 of 1999 for declaring the respondents therein as the land grabbers of an extent of 7368 Sq.Mts in T.S. No. 8/1, 1/1/2 and 9/1/2 Block “B”, Ward -10, correlated to Survey No. 129/62 of Shaikpet village is classified as Evacuee Property belonging to the Government.
5. L.G.C. No. 28 of 2002 was filed by Mr. Vallabhaneni Subba Rao and Mr. Vallabhaneni Raghavender Rao against Smt A Saritha Reddy, Mr U.Vijay Kumar and the State for declaring the respondents as the land grabbers of 500 sq.yards out of an extent of Ac.1.40 cents located in Survey No.129/67 (old) RE-Survey No. 141 and T.S. No. 8/1, T.S. No. 1/1/2 of Shaikpet village, Hyderabad, on the same ground that the respondents occupied the property illegally, whereas by the common order dated 10.3.2004 while dismissing the L.G.C.Nos. 17 and 114 of 1999 filed by the State, the Special Court allowed the L.G.C. No. 28 of 2002 observing therein;
“In the result, the applicants are having possessory title in the application schedule property. The possession of the applicants is true, is valid and is legal against the entire world except the true owner Aziz Asif son of Hyatunnisa Begum (The vendor under Ex.C-8) and Liaquath Jung, Former Finance Minister in Nizam State. The first respondent is a land grabber. The first respondent is directed to vacate the application schedule property and deliver vacant possession of the schedule property to the applicants within two months from this date, failing which the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer shall initiate steps as contemplated under Rule 15 (2) of the Rules framed under the Act and submit a compliance report to this Court within two months, after expiry of the above said two moths period granted to the first respondent to deliver vacant possession of the property to the applicants. The application against respondents 2 and 3 is dismissed. No costs.”
6. Aggrieved by the order, the respondents therein i.e., Smt A Saritha Reddy and another also filed a writ pe
