THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.8357 of 2013

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings vide RC.No.E2/8495/2002, dated 16.01.2013 issued by the respondent No.3 requesting respondent No.5 to withdraw the permission granted to petitioner No.2, as arbitrary, unjustified and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

2. Heard Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner No.1-Vivekavardhini Educational Society, registered under the provisions of the AP (TA) Public Societies Registration Act, 1350 Fasli vide Registration No.1628/84, has established petitioner No.2-Vivekavardhini Gurukula Vidyalayam (High School) with residential accommodation, mainly for the purpose of imparting education in the tribal area for upliftment of children of tribal people. The petitioner had purchased land admeasuring Ac.4.03 guntas in Sy.No.837/39, 837/30, 837/25, 837/24 at Mulugu Village and Mandal (for short ‘subject land’) under simple sale deeds dated 24.05.1984, 24.06.1985 and 21.05.1996 from Nalubala Sarangam, Madula Durgaiah and Bandaru Saramma, respectively, for valid consideration, and constructed school building after duly obtaining permission. Petitioner No.1 obtained recognition from Government and established primary school in the year 1985-1986 which was subsequently upgraded to a High School and recognition was renewed from 2011-2012 to 2018-2019.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would submit that in the year 1993, the then Mandal Revenue Officer interfered with the operation of school stating that the lands where the petitioner was running the school are assigned land and was assigned to landless poor persons. The petitioner approached respondent No.3 and submitted application dated 23.07.1993 requesting to consider his case for alienation of land on payment of market value in the interest of tribal children who are being imparted education in the school and Respondent No.3 directed the Respondent No.8 to enquire into the matter and submit report. Accordingly, the Respondent No.8 after causing enquiry had submitted a report dated 16.11.1993. However, neither Respondent No.3 nor Respondent No.7 initiated any proceedings pursuant thereto.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that in the year 1996, Respondent No.7 and Respondent No.8 have recommended for allotment of the subject land to the petitioner No.1- society on payment of market value after cancellation of pattas granted in favour of original assignees. However, as there was no further progress, the petitioner submitted representation dated 28.03.2005 to the Government. Basing on the said representation, Respondent No.7, directed Respondent No.8 to cause an enquiry once again and submit a report. Accordingly, the Mandal Revenue Officer issued Form-I notice dated 10.09.2005 and petitioner submitted explanation stating that he was a bonafide purchaser of the land for a valuable consideration and has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject land from 1984-1985 onwards; and that the subject land is not fit for cultivation. However, the Mandal Revenue Officer passed resumption order vide proceedings No.B/4641/93, dated 10.03.2006 under the provisions of AP Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977.

Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner further submitted that though, the said resumption order was not challenged by the assignees, in view of the representation submitted by the petitioner to the Government on 28.03.2005, the Respondent No.3 again called for report from Respondent No.8 and has submitted a report vide RC.No.B/4641/93, dated 18.03.2006 to the Respondent No.7 recommending alienation of subject land to an extent of Ac.4.03 guntas on market value, and the Respondent No.3 has also recommended for alienati