Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J.
Kollati Srinivasa Rao, S/o Kollati China Venkateswarlu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Writ Petition No.14204 OF 2021, Writ Petition Nos.23758 & 9768 OF 2020
Decided On : 08-10-2021
Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Prohibition of Transfers Act, 1977 - Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 226 ,14, 19, 21 and 300A – Acquisition of Land - Writ of Mandamus the highhanded action things deeds - Petitioners in that petitioners are agriculturalists living below poverty line totally depending on agriculture income and fishing and drains - Father of petitioners occupied land to an extent of Village - Then Tahsildar issued pattadar passbook vide Patta in the name of petitioners father on Since then he was in possession and enjoyment of said land during his lifetime - Petitioner father died on – Thereafter petitioners have been enjoying same as legal representatives of their father It is contended that as petitioners are not having any house or house sites they made representation to the Government - Same was accepted and also assigned cents each as house site by granting DKT pattas in same property i.e. property occupied by petitioners father - Petitioners constructed RCC building in their respective house sites and houses were assessed to property tax by assigning door number and petitioners are paying property tax to gram panchayat.
Finding of the court :
In law declared by Apex Court and High Court when the land is classified as it is for the benefit of community at large villagers of M Village to graze their cattle - Same is not converted into assessed waste dry by following procedure and still it is deemed to be land belonging to Government - In such case sixth respondent raises any construction like Wellness Center and Village Secretariat without allotment of land to panchayat since vesting of is only for limited purpose of custody of those lands and thereby – Sixth respondent cannot exercise right and title over property to raise any construction defeating rights of community/villagers of Village at large for grazing cattle - Hence construction of Wellness Center and Village Secretariat in land which is classified as without conversion from communal land to assessed waste dry and without allotment of land by Government to Respondent is an illegality.
Result : Petition Allowed
ORDER :
1. All these three writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by different petitioners, claiming identical relief, which reads as follows:
“To issue writ of Mandamus the highhanded action things deeds of respondents in trying to interfere and dispossess the petitioners from the premises D.No.1-30 to an extent of Ac.0-03 Cents belonging to 1st and 2nd petitioners and D.No.1-10 to an extent of Ac.0-03 Cents belonging to 3rd and 4th petitioners in RS No.74/3 of Mutyalapalli Villagem, Mogaltur Mandal, West Godavari District which was granted by way of house site pattas by the 4th respondent dated 27.03.1999 is illegal irregular arbitrary against the provisions of The Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Prohibition of Transfers Act, 1977 violation of Principles of Natural Justice and violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India.”
W.P.No.23758 of 2020
“To issue writ of Mandamus declaring the high handed action of the Respondents and their subordinate in constructing Village Secretariat Building and Rythu Barosa Kendram in the property exclusively belongs to petitioners situated in R.S.No.74/3 an extent of Ac.0-24 cents of Mutyalapalli Village, Mogaltur Mandal West Godavari District without following due process of law as already assigned to the Petitioners and their father and also issued pattadhar passbook and Revenue Title Deed which is illegal irregular arbitrary against to the Principles of Natural Justice and violation of the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 apart from The Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Prohibition of Transfers Act 1977 and violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to construct Village Secretariat Building and Rythu Barosa Kendram in the property exclusively belongs to petitioners situated in R.S.No.74/3 an extent of Ac.0-24 cents of Mutyalapalli Village, Mogaltur Mandal, West Godavari District.”
W.P.No.9768 of 2020
“To issue writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents and their subordinates in trying to assign the house site Pattas of the property of respective Petitioners situated in an extent of Ac.0- 24 and Ac.0-04 cents in R.S.No.74-3 in an extent of Ac.0-02 cents in R.S.No.74/1A in an extent of and Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1 in an extent of and Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1, Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.77/9, Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.77/9, Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1 and Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1 of Mutyalapalli Village Mogultur Mandal of West Godavari District as already assigned to the Petitioners which is illegal irregular arbitrary against to the Principles of Natural Justice and violation of the provisions of The Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Prohibition of Transfers Act 1977 and violation of Articles 14 19 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India consequently direct the Respondents not to assign house site Pattas of the property of respective Petitioners situated in an extent of Ac.0-24 and Ac.0-04 cents in R.S.No.74-3 in an extent of Ac.0-02 cents in R.S.No.74/1A in an extent of and Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1 in an extent of and Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1, Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.77/9, Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.77/9, Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1 and Ac.0-03 cents in R.S.No.80/1 of Mutyalapalli Village Mogultur Mandal of West Godavari District.”
2. As the facts in all the three writ petitions and contentions of the respondents are one and the same, I find that it is appropriate to decide all the three writ petitions by common order.
3. W.P.No.23758 of 2020 is taken as leading case to decide the real controversy between the parties, since Respondent Nos. 4 & 6 filed their counter affidavit in W.P.No.23758 of 2020 and no counter affidavit is filed in other two writ petitions.
4. The case of the petitioners in brief is that, the petitioners are agriculturalists liv
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
