Point of Law : Principles of res judicata or a principle analogous thereto shall be applied with caution and circumspection in dealing with a case arising under Regulation meant for protection of tribes - If proceedings were dropped earlier for reason that 3rdrespondent-tribal could not produce sufficient evidence, it does not preclude a subsequent enquiry.

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.1in initiating the proceedings under LTR Case No.50/2008/MGR,Dt 03.01.2008 and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, without authority of law and unconstitutional.

2. Brief facts of the case:

2.1 The petitioners submits that he is the owner and possessor of land to an extent of Acs.1.31 guntas in Survey No.228 of Bandarugudem village, Manguguru Mandal, Khammam District and the same was purchased in the year 1961 from Bandaru Tirumali who is the Grandfather of respondent No.3. After purchase he had developed the said land by investing huge amounts, by digging well and by obtaining electricity connection and also raised mango Garden and constructed a house in part of the land and obtained house numbers bearing No.7-1-200 to 2004 from Gram Panchayat. He has also constructed another house and his name was mutated in the revenue records and pattadar pass books were issued by revenue authorities.

2.2 The father of respondent No.3 namely Chinnabbai initiated proceedings under Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas land Transfer Regulations and Rules 1959 (hereinafter called for brevity as ‘Regulations’), before respondent No.1 vide Case No.24/MGR/83 and respondent No.1 dropped the said proceedings by its order dated 02.02.1984 holding that there is no violation of Regulations and the said order has become final. The petitioner further submits that grandfather of respondent No.3 initiated proceedings under Regulations before respondent No.1 vide Case No.238/87/MGR and the same was dismissed on 04.12.1987 on the ground that the subject matter of case was already disposed of on 02.02.1984 and further action is dropped. He further submits that grandfather of respondent No.3 initiated proceedings once again before respondent No.1 in the year 1988 vide Case No.1132/88/MGR and the same was dismissed on 21.07.1992. He further submits that father of respondent No.3 categorically deposed before respondent No.1 in the year 1984 that his father along with him and his two brothers have sold the subject lands to petitioner No.1, twenty four (24) years back.

2.3 The petitioners further submits that respondent No.1 once again initiated proceedings at the instance of respondent No.3 vide letter No.86/2002/MGR and issued notice directing the petitioners to attend the hearing on 03.10.2002 and petitioner No.2 appeared before respondent No.1 on the said date but respondent No.1 has not attended the office due to rastha rook and the case was adjourned to 24.10.2002. Subsequently, the petitioners engaged a counsel and filed counter before respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 without giving opportunity of hearing passed the order on 11.11.2002 directing the petitioners to vacate the land to an extent of Acs.0.10 guntas.

2.4 Aggrieved by the said order dated 11.11.2002, the petitioners filed appeal before Agent to Government/District Collector on 24.12.2002 along with stay petition. When the appellate authority failed to pass order in the stay application, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing W.P.No.357 of 2003 and the same was disposed on 08.01.2003 suspending the order dated 11.11.2002 passed by respondent No.1 till disposal of the appeal. Subsequently, the said appeal was transferred to the Agent to Government at Khammam and renumbered as CMA No.1 of 2003and the same was allowed by setting aside the order dated 11.11.2002 and remitted the matter to respondent No.1 for fresh disposal by its order dated 21.04.2005.

2.5 Questioning the said order dated 21.04.2005, the petitioners filed W.P.No.11865 of 2005. This court allowed the writ petition and set aside the orders dated 21.04.2005. Aggrieved by the same respondent No.3 filed W.A.No.877 of 2006 and the same was dismissed on 07.09.2006 granting liberty to respondent No.3 to file a review petition. Thereafter, respondent No.3 filed Review W.P.M.P. No.27217 of 2006 and the same was dismissed on 21.12.2006. Agai