Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Challa Gunaranjan, J.
Etti Sriramulu Reddy S/o. Late Ellappa Reddy and ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department – Respondents
Writ Petition No : 1499 of 2010
Decided On : 06-01-2025
(A) Estate Abolition Act, 1948 - Section 11(a) - Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300A - Writ petitions challenging inaction of authorities regarding grant of ryotwari pattas for lands in Daminedu Village - Petitioners claimed rights based on ancestral possession and prior claims - Court found no valid claims pending before authorities and dismissed petitions. (Paras 2, 20, 25)
(B) Legal Principles - Claim for ryotwari patta must be made in accordance with statutory provisions and proper applications must be submitted to the Settlement Officer - Mere representations do not constitute valid claims. (Paras 13, 20)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners claimed rights over lands in Daminedu Village, asserting ancestral possession and pending claims for ryotwari pattas, but failed to demonstrate valid claims before the Settlement Officer. (Paras 5, 25)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioners did not file proper claims as required under Section 11(a) of the Act, and the lands were classified as Government lands. (Paras 20, 25)
Issues: Whether the petitioners had valid claims for ryotwari pattas and whether the authorities acted unlawfully in transferring the lands. (Paras 20, 25)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that claims for ryotwari pattas must be made in accordance with the statutory provisions, and the petitioners failed to establish any pending claims or rights over the lands. (Paras 20, 25)
Result: Writ petitions dismissed.
ORDER :
Challa Gunaranjan, J.
As facts in both these two writ petitions are common, both these writ petitions are disposed of together. W.P. No.1499 of 2010 is filed by 58 petitioners, all are residents of Daminedu Village and whereas, W.P. No.3049 of 2010 has been filed by 5 petitioners, who are also petitioners 2, 13, 32, 33 and 46 in W.P. No.1499 of 2010.
2. W.P.No.1499 of 2010 is filed with the following prayer:
“to declare the inaction of the 1st respondent in processing the Memo No.52300/JA-2/2008-1, dated 17.10.2008 in respect of the lands of the petitioners’ in Sy. Nos.46 to 57, 173 to 182, 211, 192 to 207 an extent of Ac 175.00 cents of Daminedu Revenue Village, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the provisions of the Estate Abolition Act, 1964 and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to pass orders for issuance of ryotwari pattas in favour of the petitioners in respect of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.46 to 57, 173 to 182, 211, 192 to 207 an extent of Ac 175 00 of Daminedu Revenue Village, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District, as per G.O. Ms. No.548. dated 28.04.2003 and for a consequential direction.”
3. W.P. No.3049 of 2010 is filed with the following prayer:
“to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in transferring the petitioners lands situated in Sy.Nos.196/6 to 13, 197/1 to 12, 198/1, 3 to 11, 199/1 & 2, 200/1 & 2, 203/1 to 6, 204/1 to 6, 205/1 to 5, 206/1 & 2, 308/3 to 7, 15 and 16(P) totaling an extent of Ac. 35.53 cents situated in Daminedu Village, within territorial Jurisdiction of Tiruchanur Gram Panchayat, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District, pending before the 1st respondent for grant of ryotwari patta under Section 68 of Estate Abolition Act 1948 in Memo No 52300/JA2/20081 from the A.P.State Housing Corporation Ltd., Chittoor to Tirupathi Municipal Corporation, which has no territorial jurisdiction vide Memo No.APSHCL/Land Allocation/2008, dated 16.06.2009 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the status quo orders granted by the 2nd respondent vide File No. P1/288/2008, dated 17.03.2008 and also violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and Article 243(ix) of the Constitution of India and Sub-Section (d) of Section 3 of Estate Abolition Act, 1948 and Regulations made thereunder and also violative of the Panchayat Raj Act and set aside the proceedings in Memo No.APSHCL/Land Allocation/2008, dated 16.06.2009 and consequently, to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders for issuance of ryotwari patta in favour of the petitioners in respect of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.196/6 to 13, 197/1 to 12, 198/1, 3 to 11, 199/1 & 2, 200/1 & 2, 203/1 to 6, 204/1 to 6, 205/1 to 5, 206/1 & 2, 308/3 to 7, 15 and 16(P) totaling an extent of Ac. 35.53 cents situated in Daminedu Village, Tiruchanur Gram Panchayat, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District, on par with G.O.Ms.No.548, dated 28.04.2003 and pass such other orders.”
4. Heard Sri N.Subba Rao, learned Senior Counsel, representing on behalf of Sri M.Venkata Ramana Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing on behalf of respondents 1 to 6 and Sri E.V.Jagannadha Rao, learned standing counsel representing on behalf of the 7th respondent.
5. (a) The petitioners claimed to be either legal heirs or purchasers and that their ancestors or predecessors in title have been in occupation and enjoyment of various extents of land in Daminedu Village. It is stated that the said village was Inam Village notified and taken over under The Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (hereinafter, for short ‘The Act’). During the said process, survey operations were conducted in the year 1961 and also as there were certain mistakes, fresh survey was conducted during the years 2006 & 2009 and the lands which have been in occupation and possession of the petitioners have been
Claims for ryotwari pattas must comply with statutory requirements; mere representations do not constitute valid claims.
Rights to land under the Andhra Pradesh Estates Abolition Act require proof of continuous possession and corresponding applications for Ryotwari pattas pre-dating the act's enactment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove that the subject lands are ryoti lands and have vested with the Government under the Ryotwari Act, 1948, in order to obtai....
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....
Point of Law- Section 11 (a) of the Act it is clear that every ryot who claims for grant of ryotwari patta under Section 11 (a) of the Act has to fulfill the following requirements.(i) the land claim....
Civil Courts retain jurisdiction to adjudicate land classification disputes under the Estate Abolition Act despite administrative orders, emphasizing the necessity for factual determination on ryoti ....
Land granted under Inams Abolition Act confers ownership, which cannot be revoked without due process; arbitrary state action is unlawful.
The court ruled that to obtain ryotwari patta under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams Act, the claimant must demonstrate pre-existing ownership rights, which were not established in this case.
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
