IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ALOK ARADHE, N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, JJ.
Ahmed Awad Bakhrayaba and Others – Appellants
Versus
Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat, Hyderabad and Others – Respondents
Writ Appeal No.219 Of 2008
Decided On : 25-09-2023
Assigned Lands - Land Resumption - Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 - Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 - Section 14(4) - Section 14(2) - Section 10 - Section 2(1) - The court discussed the provisions of the Acts and Rules, highlighting the prohibition of alienation of assigned lands in favor of landless poor, the conditions for transfer and allotment of surplus lands, and the overriding effect of the Act 1977 over other laws. The court emphasized that the Act 1977 prohibits permanent alienation of assigned lands and empowers the competent authority to resume such lands.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants challenged the resumption of their land under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973. They claimed to be absolute owners of the land and contested the legality of the resumption.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the prohibition on alienation of assigned lands in favor of landless poor is permanent, and the Act 1977 empowers the competent authority to resume such lands. The court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the resumption of the land by the authorities.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of the resumption of the land under the Acts, the conditions for transfer and allotment of surplus lands, and the applicability of the provisions of the Acts to the appellants' case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the permanent prohibition on alienation of assigned lands in favor of landless poor under the Act 1977 and the overriding effect of the Act 1977 over other laws. It held that the Act 1977 empowers the competent authority to resume such lands.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the resumption of the land under the Acts. No costs were awarded, and pending applications were closed.
JUDGMENT :
(N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.)
Heard the learned counsel Ms. B.Vanaja Reddy for Mr. Vedula Venkata Ramana, appearing for the appellants, Dr. J.Vijaya Lakshmi, learned Government Pleader for Assignment/Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the material made available on record.
2. This intra Court Appeal has been preferred by the Appellants/Writ Petitioners against the order dated 19.12.2007 passed in W.P. No.17626 of 2007 and batch by the learned Single Judge.
3. Though the common order was passed by the learned Single Judge as the facts in all the batch of writ petitions are similar, present intra Court appeal has been preferred only against the W.P. No.17626 of 2007.
4. The Appellants/Petitioners filed W.P. No.17626 of 2007 questioning the resumption order dated 19.02.2007 passed by the Tahsildar/Mandal Revenue officer, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which was confirmed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division vide order dated 26.07.2007 under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act, 1977) as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and in contravention to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short ‘the Act 1973).
5. It is the case of the appellants/petitioners that they have purchased the land to an extent of Acs.12.07 guntas in Sy.No.43 of Kothwalguda village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy district vide registered sale deeds in 1996 and their vendors have purchased the said lands in 1981 under five registered sale deeds. By virtue of the same, they contend that they are the absolute owners and possessors of the said land. It is further submitted that they have set up a Stone factory in the said land after obtaining permission from the concerned departments.
6. In the writ affidavit, it was mentioned that the Appellants/ Petitioners are running a stone quarry industry in the name and style of M/s. AQI Metal Industry after obtaining the necessary permission from the concerned Government departments and had constructed about 55 labour quarters (R.C.C.), Office over an extent of 2000 sft. It is further submitted that the workers employed in the stone crushing activity, which is being carried on in the said land, are residing in the said labour quarters.
7. While so, the Tahsildar Shamshabad issued a notice dated 14.03.2005 under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977 (for short ‘the Rules 1977’) alleging that the Appellants/petitioners have contravened the provisions of the Act, 1977. It is further submitted that the said land originally was ceiling surplus land within the meaning of the provisions of the Act, 1973, but without considering their explanations dated 25.11.2005, the Tahsildar resumed the said land by the impugned notice, against which, the appeal was filed by Appellants/ Petitioners before the Revenue Divisional Officer and the same was dismissed by an order dated 26.07.2007.
8. It is the contention of the Appellants/Petitioners that the said land was ceiling surplus land and that there was no permanent restriction prohibiting alienation. Therefore, the resumption of the land under the provisions of the Act, 1977 is illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1973.
9. Taking into consideration the contentions of the Appellants/ Petitioners, the learned Single Judge framed the following questions for consideration:
2. Whether the condition on the allottee/transferee to pay, under Section 14(2) of the Act 1973 read with Rule 10(4)(a) of the Rules 1974, a sum calculated at 50 times the land revenue in 15 annual instalments
Vemula Satyavathi Vs. District Collector reported in (2003) (3) ALD 415
Dammalapati Ramalingam Vs. District Collector, Khammam District
The Act 1977 prohibits permanent alienation of assigned lands in favor of landless poor and empowers the competent authority to resume such lands.
Point of law: The lands vested in the Government under this Act shall be allotted for use as house-sites for agricultural labourers, village artisans or other poor persons owning no houses or house-s....
Point of law : Registered sale transaction in respect of the subject land on different occasions of petitioner’s predecessors in title established that the subject land was treated as free hold land.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that authorities must establish that land is assigned with a condition prohibiting alienation before initiating proceedings under the A.P. Assigned....
The absence of a non-alienation clause in the original land assignment means it cannot be classified as assigned land under the A.P. Assigned Lands Act, allowing for its registration.
The competent authority must establish jurisdictional facts before proceeding with land resumption, ensuring adherence to natural justice principles.
Assigned Land - Resumption proceedings maintainable - Act contemplates taking action at any point of time soon after it comes to the knowledge of the officials about the contravention of the provisio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the resumption of land assigned to the Appellants violated their fundamental rights under Article 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. T....
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.