Revenue authorities lack jurisdiction to direct possession of private property without a fair hearing; proper remedy lies in civil court.

COMMON ORDER:

As both these writ petitions are filed challenging the common order passed by the Tahsildar, Machareddy Mandal, Machareddy Village, Nizamabad District No.B/9765/2009 dated 06.09.2010, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and learned Counsel for the unofficial respondent, in both the writ petitions.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner in W.P.No.24891 of 2010 is owner of land admeasuring Ac.2.10 gts in Sy.No.256 situated in Machareddy Village and Mandal, Nizamabad District, through the registered gift-cum-settlement deed dated 31.03.1980 executed by his father and after taking possession, he has constructed a rice mill namely ‘Sri Venkateswara Rice Mill’ in the said land in the year, 1980 after obtaining permission from the Grampanchayat, Machireddy, on 15.04.1980 and also obtained licence bearing No.S4/635/80 dated 19.08.1981 for installation of machinery and since then, he has been using the entire land for the purpose of rice mill, house sheds and servant quarter etc., and there are no agricultural operations in the said land.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondent No.2 issued show cause notice vide letter No.B/9765/2009 dated 30.06.2010 under Section 5(3) of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act, 1971’) stating that the unofficial respondent has submitted a representation claiming that she has got the said property under partition Decree passed in O.S.No.202 of 1990 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Sircilla dated 20.03.1997. The petitioner has submitted his explanation stating that the land in question is not agricultural land and it is a patta land and after mutation, pattadar passbooks were also issued in his favour and the land is being used for rice mill. The respondent No.2 without considering the explanation and without hearing the petitioner has passed the impugned order on 06.09.2010 directing the respondent No.3 to take possession of land from the petitioner.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that as on the date of filing of the suit, the property was transferred to third parties and the unofficial respondent has no interest to claim over the said property and the decree dated 20.03.1997 passed in O.S.No.202 of 1990 cannot be implemented under Rule 27(4) of the ROR Rules. He further submits that the proceedings under the Act are not maintainable since the land ceased to be an agricultural land as it was converted into non-agricultural purpose by constructing a rice mill. He further submits that for recovery of possession, the revenue authorities have no jurisdiction and the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1971 and requested to allow the writ petition.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner in W.P.No.24905 of 2010 is owner of land admeasuring Ac.2.04 gts in Sy.No.268/6 situated in Machareddy Village and Mandal, Nizamabad District having purchased the same from one Mr. Buggarapu Laxmaiah and pattadar passbook and title deeds were also issued in his favour on 15.12.1997. Thereafter, the petitioner has entered into agreement of sale-cum-General Power of Attorney dated 22.01.2010 with one Sri Challa Narasimha Reddy vide document bearing No.105/2010 and the land was converted into plots and sold to various persons under registered sale deeds and in Sy.Nos.268/1 to 6, several transactions have taken place by transferring the plots ranging from 200 to 400 sq. yards to various purchasers and the same are reflected in the Encumbrance Certificate.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that basing on the representation of the unofficial respondent for mutation of land on the basis of the Decree passed in O.S.No.202 of 1990 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Si