Point of law: The lands vested in the Government under this Act shall be allotted for use as house-sites for agricultural labourers, village artisans or other poor persons owning no houses or house-sites, or transferred to the weaker-sections of the people dependent on agriculture for agriculture or for purposes ancillary thereto, in such manner as may be prescribed.

JUDGMENT :

Arup Kumar Goswami, J.

1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 19.12.2007, passed in W.P.No.2985 of 2003 and W.P.Nos.16078, 17626, 20308 and 24528 of 2007, by the petitioners of W.P.No.2985 of 2003, challenging dismissal of the Writ Petition.

2. The case of the writ petitioners is that they were given individual orders of allotment of the land, totally admeasuring Ac.30.74 cents in Sy.No.56(1) and (2) of Aganampudi village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, by the Tahsildar, Anakapalli, vide proceedings dated 12.05.1977 in exercise of powers under Section 10(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short “the 1973 Act”) and they were required to pay stipulated amount within a period of 15 years. They had paid the total amount by the year 1992 and, thus, they have absolute and unfettered right and ownership over the land, which is not fit for cultivation as it consists of uneven contour and big rocks. Their pattas were cancelled by the proceedings of the 1st respondent, dated 30.11.1993 on the ground that the land had not been cultivated and Writ Petition being W.P.No.6998 of 1999 having been filed challenging the cancellation of allotment, the same was allowed by this Court by judgment dated 08.08.2001.

3. The present Writ Petition came to be filed, challenging the notice dated 25.01.2003, issued by the 1st respondent in exercise of powers under Section 14 (5) of the 1973 Act, asking the petitioners to show cause within a period of 30 days from the date of communication of the notice, as to why he should not order resumption of the land referred to in the two documents as indicated in the notice, by forfeiting of the amount paid in terms of Section 14 (2) of the 1973 Act, by virtue of and in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 14 (5) of the 1973 Act, read with Rule 10 (5) of the Rules made.

4. In the said notice, which was issued to 18 petitioners, it was indicated that they had entered into two sale agreements/General Power of Attorney in respect of the land for which pattas were given to them, covered by Sy.No.56 (1) and (2) of Aganampudi village, GajuwakaMandal, Visakhapatnam District, with one Namburu Srinivasa Rao, Project Manager, G.P.R. Housing Private Limited, under two registered documents – one to the extent of Ac.26.28 cents in Sy.No.56 (1) and (2) for a consideration of Rs.28,90,800/-and other to the extent of Ac.4.46 cents for a consideration of Rs.4,90,600/-. It is further indicated in the said notice that they had authorized the General Power of Attorney holder to form layout of the house sites approved by Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority and to secure clearance from the Special Officer (Urban Land Ceiling) to sell away the house site plots to intending purchasers and get sale deeds registered on their behalf. It is also stated therein that, from the said two documents, it is clear that they had deliberately alienated the aforesaid land in favour of the said Namburu Srinivasa Rao, in violation of the conditions of transfer of land, in contravention of the provisions of law and in violation of Section 14(4) of the 1973 Act read with conditions prescribed under clause (iii) of sub-section (4) and clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 10 of the Rules.

5. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Revenue Divisional officer, it is stated that the petitioners were allotted surplus land as contemplated under Section 14 (4) of the 1973 Act and each of the petitioners was granted Ac.2.19 cents of land in terms of Section 14(4) of the Act. One of the conditions laid out was that the land shall not be alienated in any manner whatsoever. The payment in terms of Section 14(2) of the 1973 Act, was made by the petitioners and the petitioners were granted patta in the year 1977 itself (perhaps should have been 1992). The assertion of the petitioners that they have become absolute owners of the lands and that they had right to alie