Back
2020 Supreme(AP) 752
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
Parvatam Satyanarayana – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. – Respondents
WP No. 1676 of 2020
Decided On : 30-01-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : M.R.S. Srinivas
For the Respondent: Government Pleader
Gramakantam land vests in the Gram Panchayat unless a notification is issued under Section 58(2) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act divesting the land from the Gram Panchayat to the Government.
Headnote:
{'KEYWORD': 'Land Encroachment', 'SUBJECT': 'Jurisdiction of Gram Panchayat over Gramakantam Land', 'ACT SECTION LIST': 'Section 6 of A.P. Land Encroachment Act, Section 53 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, Section 22-A of Registration Act, G.O. Ms. No. 187, dated 27.5.2015', 'SUMMARY': 'The court held that Gramakantam land vests in the Gram Panchayat unless a notification is issued under Section 58(2) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act divesting the land from the Gram Panchayat to the Government. In the absence of such a notification, the respondents had no jurisdiction to take steps to evict the petitioner, who was in possession of the land, by invoking the provisions of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act.'}
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was in possession of an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents in Sy. No. 294/23 of Arulla Village, Tadepallugudem Mandal, West Godavari District. The fourth respondent issued a notice under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act and passed an order under Section 6 of the Act, declaring the petitioner as an encroacher and directing him to vacate the land.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the land in question was classified as Gramakantam and therefore vested in the Gram Panchayat under Section 53 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act. The respondents had no jurisdiction to take action against the petitioner under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act without impleading the Gram Panchayat.
Issues: Whether the respondents had jurisdiction to take action against the petitioner under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act without impleading the Gram Panchayat.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of Section 53 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, which vests Gramakantam land in the Gram Panchayat, and G.O. Ms. No. 187, dated 27.5.2015, which directs the District Collectors to withdraw Gramakantam lands from the lists of properties prohibited from registration under Section 22-A of the Registration Act.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order passed by the fourth respondent under Section 6 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, declaring the same as illegal and arbitrary.
ORDER :
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed, questioning the proceedings dated 13.1.2020, issued by fourth respondent herein/Tahsildar, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, in respect of an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents out of Acs. 2.93 cents in Sy. No. 294/23 of Arulla Village, Tadepalligudem Mandal, West Godavari District, under Section 6 of A.P. Land Encroachment Act (for short 'the Act'), declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
2. The petitioner is the person in possession of property of an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents in Sy. No. 294/23 of Arulla Village, Tadepallugudem Mandal, West Godavari District, possession of petitioner is not in dispute, because fourth respondent issued notice under Section 7 of the Act and passed order under Section 6 of the Act. According to the petitioner, land in Sy. No. 294/23 is classified as Gramakantam, it is under cultivation by raising paddy crop. As per notice under Section 6 of the Act, when land is classified as Gramakantam, respondents have no authority to exercise power to evict the petitioner, invoking provisions of the Act, by issuing notice under Section 7 and Section 6 of the Act, requested to set aside the order passed under Section 6 of the Act.
3. Whereas learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue contended that Gram Panchayat is competent to exercise power on all public roads, poramboke etc., in terms of Section 53 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, without impleading Gram Panchayat, writ petition is not maintainable. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to G.O. Ms. No. 187, dated 27.5.2015, issued by Revenue (ASSN.I) Department.
4. Undisputedly, petitioner is in possession of subject land, notice under Section 7 of the Act was issued, thereafter passed order under Section 6 of the Act. However, as per the notice issued by fourth respondent, under Section 7 of the Act, in Column No. 3 of schedule, the land is classified as Gramakantam. Therefore, such Gramakantam is deemed to have; been vested on the Gram Panchayat on its constitution in terms of Section 53 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act. Even in G.O. Ms. No. 187, dated 27.5.2015 issued based on orders in WP No. 553 of 2012, dated 9.7.2012 between Nagarala Nirvasithula Welfare Association v. The Government of A.P. where the Court held that:
"On behalf of respondents, reliance is placed upon judgment of this Court in Banne Gandhi and others v. District Collector, R.R. District, 2007 (4) ALD 374, which arose under A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Section 58(1) therefore directs that all porambokes viz., grazing grounds, threshing floors, burning and burial grounds, cattle stands, carts tanks etc., vest in the Gram Panchayat. Sub-section (2) thereof directs that the Government may, at any time, by notification in the A.P. Gazette, direct that any porambokes referred to in sub-section (1) shall cease to vest in the Gram Panchayat.
The Government initiated steps to issue house site pattas over the land which formed part of Gramakantam. The same was challenged stating that Gramakantam vests in the Gram Panchayat and that the Government cannot grant house site pattas in it. A learned Single Judge of this Court held that there is no mention of Gramakantam in sub-section (1) and thereby, the question of such lands vesting in the Government does not arise".
5. Thus, after careful examination of matter, the Government has decided that Gramakantam land vests in the Gram Panchayat, there is a need to withdraw these lands from the purview of Section 22-A of Registration Act, to remove the hardship of general public. Therefore, Government ordered that the District Collectors shall withdraw Gramakantam lands from the lists of properties, prohibited from registration, furnished to the Registering Officers, under Section 22-A of Registration Act. It shall be the responsibility of Gram Panchayats to take appropriate action in respect of Gramakantam land including pr
