Land assigned to Ex-Servicemen cannot be resumed after ten years without adherence to procedural safeguards, reflecting the right entrenched in statutory provisions and principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT/ORDER :

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :

…to declare the action of the respondents particularly R4 is in violation of Articles 14, 16, 21 and Article 30 of the State Policy following Board Standing Orders assigning the land to Ex-Serviceman in passing the impugned order Rc.(E8)/286/2018, dated 01.02.2021 by R4 upholding the resumption orders passed by Revenue Divisional Officer Naidupeta issued vide Rc.B2/391/2017 dated 01.02.2018 by issuing a writ of mandamus and consequently set aside the impugned order passed by the R4 vide impugned order Rc.(E8)/286/2018, dated 01.02.2021 and pass order or such other orders deems fit and proper in the interest of ….”

2. The husband of the 1st petitioner and father of the petitioner Nos.2 to 6 namely Sri Ananta Padmanabham was Ex-Serviceman who served in Indian Army from 1939 to 1952 and it is stated that, he was awarded Independence Medal, War Medal, Burma War of 1939-1945 Medal. It is further case of the petitioners that he served for eleven years, five months and eleven days in Indian Army. After his discharge from Indian Army, in due recognition of his services rendered to the country, the 6th respondent granted DKT patta vide Patta No.66/1409, dated 22.11.1999, in his favor, under Ex-Servicemen quota in respect of land admeasuring an extent of Acs.5.00 cents in Sy.No.51-12 of Yenkollu Village, Doravarisatram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. It is further case of the petitioners that, the original assignee and the 1st petitioner reclaimed the land and dug bore-well for the purpose of cultivation. The said assignment was made pending transfer of classification of the subject land from grazing poramboke to AWD (Assessed Waste Dry). It is further stated that, since the date of grant, the original assignee i.e., Sri Ananta Padmanabham was in peaceful possession, enjoyment and cultivated the said land till his demise on 18.02.2002. Subsequently, pattadar passbook was issued in favor of the 1st petitioner, after conducting enquiry.

3. It is further stated that the petitioners obtained financial assistance from nationalized banks by depositing the DKT patta, so as to cultivate the subject land. It is further stated that RSR record also reflect the name of the original assignee. It is further stated that, while so, the 6th respondent issued show-cause notice dated 31.07.2011, to the 1st petitioner asking her to submit explanation within a period of three days, as to why the subject land shall not be resumed by cancelling the assignment made in favor of her husband, on the ground that as the 5th respondent returned the proposal to change the classification of the land as the same is not fit for cultivation and the it can be utilized for public purpose. To the said show-cause notice, the 1st petitioner submitted explanation dated 10.08.2011, stating that the original assignee and herself spent more than Rs.7,00,000/- for reclaiming the subject land and made the same fit for cultivation. It is further averred that they have dug bore well, cultivated the subject land by raising dry crops during faslis 1416 to 1419 and the same was recorded in copies of adangals.

4. It is further case of the petitioners that, without considering their case in its proper perspective, the 6th respondent passed order vide Proceedings Bearing Rc.No.24/2010, dated 28.08.2011, whereby and whereunder resumed the land to Government under Section 4(1) of Act 9 of 1977, as there is clear violation of Condition No.2