IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
D. RAMESH, J.
M. Surya Rao - Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 3383 of 2022
Decided On : 03-11-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Andhra Pradesh Inams Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act 1956 – Section 3(3) – Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987 – Section 6A(1), 87 – Registration Act, 1908 – Section 22-A – Case of petitioners is that after enactment of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Inams Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act 1956, Tahsildhar has instituted proceedings under provisions of Inams Abolition Act and issued a notification under Section 3(3) of Act and same was published in Visakhapatnam District Gazette holding that lands in T.D. are Inam lands situated in an Inam Village and are not held by institution – Held, Considering submissions made by both counsel, on perusal of material on record, more particularly enquiry conducted by Inams Deputy Tahsildar, as per Section 3(3) of I.A. Act and Gazette notification, also proceedings as well as patta and title deeds granted in favour of vendors of petitioners and dismissal of revision by Joint Collector vide orders, clearly discloses that subject properties mentioned in the said Survey Numbers, are private patta lands and same was also confirmed by revenue authorities – In view of said circumstances, this court is of opinion that subject properties are private patta lands and inclusion of said properties in prohibited list under Section 22-A of Registration Act, is illegal – Respondents are directed to delete subject properties from prohibitory list under Section 22-A of Act within a period of four (04) weeks, from date of receipt of a copy of order – Writ Petition disposed of.
ORDER :
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to declare the action of the 2nd respondent to include the land in R.S.No.268/2 in an extent of Ac.0.60 cents, 269/2 an extent of Ac. 13.68 cents, 269/4 in an extent of Ac.0.87 cents, 270/3 an extent of Ac.0.85 cents, 271/4 an extent of Ac.3.01 cents, 262/2P an extent of Ac. 0.10 cents, 262/3 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 262/4 an extent of Ac.0.28 cents, 265 an extent of Ac.4.66 cents, 266/2 an extent of Ac.0.23 cents, 266/3 an extent of Ac.0.36 cents, 266/4 an extent of Ac.0.51 cents, 266/5 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/6 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/7 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/8 an extent of Ac.0.10 cents, 266/9 an extent of Ac.0.16 cents, 266/10 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/11 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/12 an extent of Ac.0.20 cents, 266/13 an extent of Ac.0.14 cents, 266/14 an extent of Ac.0.16 cents, 266/15 an extent of Ac.2.42 cents, 122 Part an extent of Ac.1.05 cents of Pandrangi village of Padmanabham Mandal, in the Prohibited List under Section 22A (1)(C) of the Registration Act even though the petitioners are the owners of the lands.
2. As per the averments made in the Writ Petition, the case of the petitioners is that after the enactment of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Inams Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act 1956, the Tahsildhar has instituted proceedings under the provisions of Inams Abolition Act and issued a notification under Section 3(3) of the Act and the same was published in Visakhapatnam District Gazette dated 11.08.1960 holding that the lands in T.D.No.1251 are Inam lands situated in an Inam Village and are not held by institution. The decision taken by the Inams Deputy Tahsildar became final as no appeal was filed against the said decision as contemplated under Section 3(4) of the Act. Subsequently, the Inams Deputy Tahsildhar passed an order on 30.01.1961 holding that vendors of the petitioners are entitled for Ryotwari Patta and granted Ryotwari Patta in Form No.VIII on 30.01.1961. The Ryotwari Patta granted in favour of vendors of the petitioner become final and thereafter the petitioners have purchased said property in the year 2000 and are in continuous possession of the same.
3. Based on the acquiring right over the property, on the application made by the petitioners the 4th respondent-Tahsildar has mutated the names of the petitioners in the revenue records and granted pattadar pass books and title deeds in favour of the petitioners. As against which, the 5th respondent filed a Revision before the Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam and the same is pending RP.No.47/2017. While that being so, on enquiry, the Sub Registrar, Bheemunipatnam, with regard to the valuation of the property in respect of the above survey numbers, informed to the petitioners that on the basis of the letter addressed by the Commissioner of Endowments, the above lands are included in the prohibited list and in view of the inclusion, the properties cannot be transferred in favour of 31 parties. It is submitted that the action of the 2nd respondent in addressing a letter to the Registration Department for inclusion of the lands in RS.No.268/2 an extent of Ac 0.60 cents, 269/2 an extent of Ac.13.68 cents, 269/4 an extent of Ac.0.87 cents, 270/3 an extent of Ac.0.85 cents, 271/4 an extent of Ac.3.01 cents, 262/2P an extent of Ac.0.10 cents, 262/3 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 262/4 are extent of Ac.0.28 cents, 265 an extent of Ac. 4.66 cents, 266/2 an extent of Ac.0.23 cents, 266/3 an extent of Ac.0.36 cents, 266/4 an extent of Ac.0.51 cents, 266/5 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/6 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/7 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/8 an extent of Ac.0.10 cents, 266/9 a extent of Ac.0.16 cents, 266/10 an extent of Ac.0.12 cents, 266/11 an extent Ac.0.12 cents, 266/12 an extent of Ac.0.20 cents, 266/13 an extent of Ac.0.14 cents, 266/14 an extent of Ac.0.16 cents, 266/15 an extent of Ac.2.42 cents, 122 Part
Land granted under Inams Abolition Act confers ownership, which cannot be revoked without due process; arbitrary state action is unlawful.
The court emphasized the importance of resolving disputed facts through denovo enquiry and directed the completion of the enquiry within a specified timeframe.
The court held that petitioners failed to establish their entitlement to Ryotwari Patta and did not challenge the grant to Inamdars within the statutory period, leading to dismissal of their petition....
Registered sale deeds and possession establish land ownership unless proven otherwise; the burden of proof lies with the claimant.
A purchaser under an unregistered sale deed does not acquire any right or interest in the immovable property.
The court established that jurisdictional overreach by administrative authorities can invalidate their orders, necessitating adherence to procedural fairness.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.