Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.
Smt. Kantha Nagpal W/o Sri Harbeen Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Joint Collector-II – Respondent
Writ Petition No.6963 of 2009
Decided on : 28-08-2023
Writ Petition - Land Dispute - Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 - The court discussed the provisions of the Acts, emphasizing the mandatory nature of stating the nature of assignment and the conditions of non-alienation while initiating proceedings under the Act, 1977. The court also highlighted the burden of proof on the competent authority to prove the violation of assignment conditions and the necessity of a conclusive finding on the nature of the land before exercising jurisdiction under the Act, 1977.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner claimed ownership of certain lands and objected to the initiation of proceedings under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 by respondent No.3. The petitioner contended that the subject land was not assigned and lacked evidence of assignment with a condition of non-alienation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned orders failed to establish that the subject land was assigned subject to a condition of non-alienation, rendering the proceedings without jurisdiction. The court also noted irregularities in the orders passed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 and quashed the impugned orders.
Issues: The key issue was the validity of the proceedings initiated under the Act, 1977, and the absence of conclusive findings on the nature of the land and its assignment status.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the mandatory nature of stating the nature of assignment and the conditions of non-alienation while initiating proceedings under the Act, 1977. It also highlighted the burden of proof on the competent authority to prove the violation of assignment conditions and the necessity of a conclusive finding on the nature of the land before exercising jurisdiction under the Act, 1977.
Final Decision: The impugned orders dated 04.02.2009 passed by respondent No.1 confirming the orders passed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 dated 24.09.2007 and 28.02.2002 respectively were quashed insofar as the land which is the subject matter of this Writ Petition is concerned and the Writ Petition was allowed.
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by respondent No.1 in case No.E1/5846/2007, dated 04.02.2009, confirming the orders passed in proceedings No.D/2639/2006, dated 24.09.2007 and proceedings No.B/1294/2001, dated 28.02.2002, passed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 respectively and to quash the same.
2. This Court, while admitting the Writ Petition by an order, dated 02.04.2009, suspended the operation of the impugned orders. The said order, dated 02.04.2009, was made absolute by an order, dated 02.02.2015.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the absolute owner and possessor of the lands admeasuring Acs.2.38 gts., Acs.2.37 gts., and Acs.3.26 gts., situated in Sy.Nos.177/4, 177/5, and 177/27 respectively of Aziz Nagar Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same under various registered Sale Deeds vide document Nos.10054/1988, 8794/1983 and 9/1981, dated 18.07.1988, 16.07.1990, and 28.02.1981 respectively, and her predecessors-in-title have purchased the land in Sy.No.177/4 admeasuring Acs.2.38 gts., from the original pattadar Mr. Ellaiah under registered Sale Deed, dated 25.05.1966 vide document No.513/1966 after obtaining necessary permission under Sections 47 and 48 of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act, 1950'), granted by respondent No.3 herein through proceedings D.Dis.No.A-4/541/66, dated 24.05.1966. So also, the land admeasuring Acs.2.32 gts., situated in Sy.No.177/5 was purchased by the vendor of the petitioner from the original pattadar namely Mr. Dappu Pentaiah under registered Sale Deed, dated 25.05.1966, vide document No.515/1966, after obtaining permission under Sections 47 and 48 of the Act, 1950, through proceedings D.Dis.No.A4/544/66, dated 24.05.1966. Similarly, the land admeasuring Acs.3.26 gts., situated in Sy.No.177/27 was purchased by the vendor of the petitioner from the original pattadar Mr. M.Gandaiah and four others under registered Sale Deed, dated 25.05.1966, vide document No.511/1966 after obtaining permission under Sections 47 and 48 of the Act, 1950, through proceedings D.Dis.No.A4/540/66, dated 24.05.1966. The petitioner also claims to have constructed Poultry Sheds and have been carrying on its operations.
4. While things stood thus, respondent No.3 herein initiated the proceedings under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act, 1977’), by issuing Form-I notices alleging that the petitioner and several others have purchased the assigned lands situated in Sy.Nos.177/1 to 177/38 of Aziz Nagar Village in contravention of Section 3 of the Act, 1977. After having received the objections raised by the petitioner and others, respondent No.3 passed an order in proceedings No.B/1294/2001, dated 28.02.2002, resuming the entire land in Sy.No.177 of Aziz Nagar Village to the Government.
5. From the perusal of the said order, dated 28.02.2002, it is evident that respondent No.3 initiated the impugned proceedings basing upon certain complaints made by the people of Aziz Nagar Village stating that huge extents of Government lands situated in Sy.Nos.176, 177, 49 and 135 of Aziz Nagar Village were assigned to eligible weaker section people during the year 1961 and all such lands were purchased by rich people from Hyderabad. From the said order, it is also evident that respondent No.1 through letter No.LP1/301/2001, dated 30.08.2001, communicated the list of unauthorized occupants over the Government lands and required respondent No.3 to take action in the matter. Thus, respondent No.3 appears to have initiated proceedings in respect of the lands situated in Sy.Nos.176 and 177 and other survey numbers of Aziz Nagar Village. From the said order, it is evident that the petitioner has raised an objection against the initiation of the impugned proceedings specifically contending that there is nothing to show that the sub
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....
Point of Law : If land assigned to landless poor persons under Laoni Rules, there must be condition of non-alienation as per settled law, otherwise it cannot be declared as void transaction.
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 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.
Authorities must prove land was assigned with non-alienation conditions to initiate resumption proceedings; failure to establish this invalidates the actions taken.
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
