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

In the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad
D.S.R. VARMA, J.
K. Siddiah Naidu - Petitioner
Versus
District Collector, Chittoor and others - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1917 of 1997
Decided on : 08-09-1999

Headnote:

Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 - Sections 5(a),8 ,74 - Agreement of Sale - Quashing of Order - Issue a new Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed in place of Old Pass Book - Owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring cents in Survey situated at Tirupati Urban Tirupati - He further claims that these lands are purchased under an agreement of sale after paying sale consideration and he was put in physical possession in pursuance of such agreement of sale - Original vendor of petitioner who died subsequently was one - Earlier Writ Petition was filed by writ petitioner and this Court was pleased to pass orders - Thereupon petitioner placed entire record before third respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer for making an enquiry contemplated under A.P. Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act 1971 hereinafter called Act - During course of said enquiry third respondent had also addressed letter to Sub-Registrar to fix up value of property for purpose of registration on which Joint Sub-Registrar fixed Registration and Stamp value at - When petitioner offered to deposit said amount Joint Sub-Registrar expressed that he has to get orders from District Collector - Held, Court of considered view that it is not possible nor desirable for third respondent to pass any order other than one which is impugned in this writ petition - It is to be noted that petitioner has been seeking a relief with regard to change of entries in revenue record only on basis of agreement of sale and that itself indicates that there is any amount of dispute about possession and title of petitioner particularly in view of matter being seriously disputed by fifth respondent - In other words maintaining this writ petition means indirectly seeking verdict on disputed question of title and possession which has to be dissuaded by all means - Therefore this question of title and possession is purely in nature of question of fact which cannot be decided by an authority like third respondent and until and unless title of such a disputed property is decided oneway or other necessary changes of entries in revenue record cannot be effected by revenue officials under Act - Therefore Court find no illegality or irregularity in order passed by third respondent - Writ Petition Dismissed

ORDER :

1. This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records from the respondents in D. Dis.B/762/1997, dated 20-10-1998 of the Office of Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati (U) and quash the same as violative of Section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 and consequently implement the orders of the third respondent vide R.O.C. No. B/762/1997, dated 21-4-1998 and to make entries of Survey No. 148/1, 148/2A, 153 and 622 admeasuring Ac. 3-07 cents in Tirupati Mandal and issue a new Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed in place of the Old Pass Book.

2. At the interlocutory stage itself both the Counsel have consented for final adjudication. Hence this Order:

The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring Ac. 3-07 cents in Survey Nos. 148/1, 148/2-A, 11513 (sic. 153) and 622, situated at Tirupati Urban, Tirupati. He further claims that these lands are purchased under an agreement of sale after paying the sale consideration and he was put in physical possession in pursuance of such agreement of sale. The original vendor of the petitioner, who died subsequently, was one Sri Shankarashana Charya. Earlier, Writ Petition No. 5307 of 1997 was filed by the writ petitioner and this Court was pleased to pass orders on 18-3-1997. For convenience sake the said order is extracted hereunder.

“Under Section 5(a) of Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act the Mandal Revenue Officer is the competent authority to receive application, hold enquiry and then pass appropriate orders regarding the claim of the Pattadar and issue pattadar pass book. Having regard to this provision, there shall be a direction to the petitioner to make fresh representation to the Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi from (sic. for) holding enquiry into and dispose of the same in accordance with law. The representation of the petitioner dated 27-12-1996 may also be taken as part of the representation of the petitioner. The representation dated 27-12-1996 submitted by the petitioner to the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department was marked to the Collector, Chittoor District and the said record also may be taken for (sic. as) part of the enquiry”.

3. Thereupon the petitioner placed the entire record before the third respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer for making an enquiry contemplated under the A.P. Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 hereinafter called the Act. During the course of the said enquiry, the third respondent had also addressed letter dated 21-4-1998 to the Sub-Registrar to fix up the value of the property for purpose of registration, on which the Joint Sub-Registrar fixed the Registration and Stamp value at Rs. 23,750/- + Rs. 1300/-. When the petitioner offered to deposit the said amount, the Joint Sub-Registrar expressed that he has to get orders from the District Collector.

While so, the petitioner received the communication dated 20-10-1998 which is impugned in this writ petition. The communication reads as follows:

“In pursuance of the directions issued in the Collector's reference L. Dis.B4/15006/98 dated 14-9-1998 consequent on the instructions solicited in the matter, it is informed that your request for the issue of Pattadar Pass Book will be considered only after settlement of title in the competent Court of Jurisdiction in respect of S. No. 148/1, 148/2, 153 and 622 for an extent of 3.07 acres of Tirupathi Village and till such time your request cannot be considered.”

4. The fifth respondent viz., Sri Uttaradhi Sri Vaishnav Math, Tirupati, represented by Anirudha Ramanuja Dash, Manager is impleaded as party-respondent by orders dated 3-9-1999 in W.P.M.P. No. 9439 of 1999. Surprisingly, the fifth respondent has not been originally made a party. The fifth respondent through its counter submitted that the writ petition was not filed by Sri K. Siddaiah Naidu, the petitioner herein. His signature does not tally with

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