IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B. KRISHNA MOHAN, J.
M.Jaya Satyavathi Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.12275 OF 2018
Decided On : 02-11-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 14 - Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 - Inams Abolition Act, 1956 - Section 3(3), 8 - Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 - Section 75, 8(2), 6(a)(ii), 43, 80 - Government Grants Act, 1895- Section 3 - Wards Act,1890 - Bihar State Housing Board Act, 1982 - Section 59- Repealing and Amending (Second) Act, 2017- Section 4 - Government grants to take effect according to their tenor- Protection of life and liberty and equality before law - Summary procedure for eviction and recovery of rents -Empowers all High Courts of India to issue the writ -Whether proceedings initiated by respondent under Section 59 of Bihar State Housing Board Act, 1982, are justified and appropriate –Held, Court reach same result by applying another well-known rule of construction that general provisions yield to special provisions - Suggestion does not find support in either principle or authority – Rule that general provisions should yield to specific provisions is not an arbitrary principle made by lawyers and judges but springs from common understanding of mend and women that when same person gives tow directions, one covering a large number of matter sin general and another to only some of them, his intention is that these latter directions should prevail as regards these while as regards all rest, earlier direction should have effect - Writ petitioner would indicate several transactions having been registered in respect of subject land, after transfer of ownership in favour of writ petitioner – Provisions of Government Grants Act, 1895, which are relied upon in writ petition, was repealed by Repealing and Amending (Second) Act, 2017, with effect, by Parliament - But Section 4 of repeal Act, contains a savings clause - Petition allowed.
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner; the Government Pleader for Endowments for the respondent Nos.1 and 2; and the standing counsel for the respondent No.3.
2. This writ petition is filed questioning the Memo No.17032/ENDTS.II (1)/2015 dated 12.03.2018 of the respondent No.1 issuing show cause notice for cancellation of the order in G.O.Ms.No.275 Revenue II (Department) dated 29.03.1993 and direction to submit an explanation/representation of the petitioner within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the said proceedings.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the land in Survey No.275/F in an extent of Ac.7-04 cents of Adavivaram Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District was once part of the Vizianagaram Samstan (Estate) and had been notified under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 and the Inamdar in relation thereto was the respondent No.3-S.V.L.N.S.V.Devasthanam in whose favour a ryotwari patta has been granted by the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Visakhapatnam, dated 14.08.1996. The said order dated 14.08.1996 reads as under:
4. In the statutory enquiry under Section 3(3) of the Inams Abolition Act, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Visakhapatnam recognised the right of the petitioner over the land in question inasmuch as the petitioner’s husband Venkanna Dora had been lawfully inducted with permanent occupancy rights vide patta No.243, dated 10.07.1942 by the then Collector, Vizianagaram District. The same was reflected in the order dated 10.07.1989 passed under Section 3(3) of the above said statute. It had been taken note of therein that the Collector of the Vizianagaram District had issued Patta No.243 in D.Dis.No.1895 dated 10.07.1942. Section 8(1) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 reads as under:
(1) In the case of an inam land held by an institution in an inam village the tenant who is declared to be in occupation of the inam land on the 7th January, 1948, under Section 5, or if there is no such tenant, the tenant in occupation of the land on the date of commencement of this Act, shall have a right of permanent occupancy in that land and the said right shall be heritable and shall be transferable by sale, gift or otherwise.”
5. This statutory provision was amended by Act No.16 of 2013 (published in the State Gazette on 26.09.2013) by inserting the following proviso:
6. He further contended that after issuance of ryotwari patta in favour of the respondent No.3 on 14.08.1996, the original name stood extinguished. The Melvaram rights (ownership rights) of the land were transferred by the Government in favour of the petitioner by issuing G.O.Ms.No.275 dated 29.03.1993, under Section 75 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. By virtue of such a grant, the petitioner became the absolute owner of the property and the respondent No.3 no longer has any right therein, having collected the amount as fixed, towards the value of the land on 09.08.1984. Further the respondent No.3 also issued a no objection certificate dated 15.06.1995 in the matter of conveying the ownership rights of the land
J.K.Cotton Spg. And Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd.
CTO v. Binani Cements Ltd. {(2014) 8 SCC 319
State of Haryana vs. Ranbir @ Rana: 2006 5 SCC 167
AP at Hyderabd in Nellore Bujjamma vs. Tahsildar
Special Director and another vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and another AIR 2004 SC 1467
Ulagappa and others vs. Divisional Commissioner
State of UP vs. Brahm Datt Sharma and another AIR 1987 SC 943
Union of India and another vs. Kunisetty SAtyanarayana reported in (2006) 12 SCC 28
Abdul Latif Sahib and Ors. V. Shaik Dastagir Sahib andors 1993(3) ALT 56
V.C.Banaras Hindu Univeristy v. Shrikant (2006) 11 SCC 42
K.J.Shephard v. Union Of India (1987) 4 SCC 431
The court emphasized the importance of resolving disputed facts through denovo enquiry and directed the completion of the enquiry within a specified timeframe.
Land granted under Inams Abolition Act confers ownership, which cannot be revoked without due process; arbitrary state action is unlawful.
The court established that occupancy rights under the Inams Act require proof of personal cultivation and that revenue authorities have jurisdiction to grant such rights based on historical possessio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that inam lands granted for the performance of archaka service are attached to the office of the archaka and cannot be alienated. The Collector has....
The main legal point established is that any inam granted to a service-holder of a religious institution is deemed to be a religious endowment for the benefit of the temple, and patta does not confer....
The Act provides for dual ownership under Section 13, where the owner of the building may be different from the owner of the site, allowing the temple to revise the rent for the land on which the bui....
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.