Donka porambokes, classified as road margins, cannot be assigned to individuals as they are meant for public use and their assignment would deprive the public of their right of ingress and egress.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“To issue WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to 4 in proposing to grant DKT Patta in favor of the 5th respondent herein for the property classified as Donka Poramboke earmarked as road margin site in Survey No390 of Satyavolu Revenue Village, Kondapuram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District preventing the right of passage of the petitioner to enjoy her property in Survey No.392/ 1 as illegal arbitrary unreasonable and contrary to A.P Board Standing Orders 15 and 21 besides being violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to grant any pattas to 3rd parties or the 5th respondent herein in respect of the above property”

2. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner is the absolute owner, possessor and enjoyer of land of an extent of Ac.1-00 cents in Survey No.392/1 of Satyavolu Village, Kondapuram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. The property was gifted to the petitioner under Registered Gift Deed dated 19.11.2008 executed by her husband Mala Kondaiah. Ever since the date of said Gift Deed, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property with absolute rights. The name of the petitioner was also mutated in all relevant revenue records, obtained pattadar passbook and title deed from the revenue department under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. Mala Kondaiah - husband of the petitioner purchased the property under registered Sale Deed dated 26.03.1992 from Manchala Peda Kondaiah and others.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that, there is a donka abutting to eastern side of the property of this petitioner in an extent of Ac.1-34 cents in Sy.No.390 which is classified as ‘Donka Poramboke’. A black topped public road of 20 feet width leading from Kondapur to Kavali was laid about 50 to 60 years ago in a portion of the said donka, leaving site on either side of the said road as road margin. During the course of time, the site left as road margin on either side of the road is required for widening process. Thus, the site between the petitioner’s property and black topped road to the eastern side of the petitioner is earmarked as road margin. The same is being enjoyed by the petitioner as well as her predecessors in interest for ingress and egress, for movement of carts, cattle, vehicles and tractors to their lands. Except the said road, no other road is available to reach the petitioner’s land. It is also contended that, on either side of the said road, there is agricultural land and all the owners on either side of the donka are exercising the right of passage to reach their respective lands through the said public road and the site is earmarked as road margin and perfected the said right by prescription.

4. The petitioner came to know that the fourth respondent/Tahsildar, being influenced by the unofficial fifth respondent now proposed to assign the site earmarked as road margin in Sy.No.390 classified as ‘Donka Poramboke’ in favour of fifth respondent and his henchmen as house sites. It is contended that, the assignments of Kunta Porambokes, Tank Porambokes, Tank Beds and Donka Porambokes are forbidden as per the B.S.O 15 and B.S.O 21, as such the fourth respondent has no power, authority or jurisdiction to assign the said land either to fifth respondent or anybody else and the same is illegal and prohibited under law. Therefore, the fourth respondent/ Tahsildar is acting contrary to law, though he is obligated to implement the law effectively.

5. The petitioner made a representation to the second respondent/District Collector, marking copies to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, not to assign Donka Poramboke land (road margin site) to anyone, including the fifth respondent, as the same is being used as passage. But, the fourth respondent/Tahsildar and h