Administrative power to initiate land resumption proceedings must be exercised within a reasonable period, and assignments granted under Laoni Rules containing clauses for alienability with prior permission do not fall under the restrictive definition of 'assigned lands' as defined by the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977.

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the orders, dated 22.04.2017, passed by respondent No.3 in Revision Case No.E2/771/2015 and to quash the same and for consequential relief.

2. Heard Sri Vedula Vekata Ramana, learned senior counsel, appearing for M/s Bhardwaj Associates, learned counsel-on-record for petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignment for respondent Nos.2 to 5.

3. The brief facts of the case, shorn off unnecessary details, as averred in the writ affidavit, are that her mother-in-law, viz., Kunni Bai, during her lifetime, purchased the land admeasuring Acs.3-25 guntas in Survey Nos.151/8/1 and 151/8/2, situated at Himayathnagar Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, from Kancherla Pentaiah and Gangaiah through registered sale deed bearing document Nos.1170/65 and 1171/65 dated 27.12.1965; that ever since the date of purchase, she was in possession and enjoyment of the land and that her name was entered in the revenue records and Rythu Passbooks were issued in her favour in the year 1982.

3.1. It is further averred that Kancherla Pentaiah and Gangaiah, the vendors of the petitioner’s mother-in-law, were in occupation of the said land from 1955–58, and recognizing their long-standing possession, their names were entered in the Sesala Pahani prepared under the Record of Rights 1358F. The Government had also issued permission under Rule 9(g) of the Laoni Rules, 1950, vide proceedings No.A9/870/1960 and No.A9/13555/60, dated 18.12.1961, to them and they continued in possession until execution of the registered sale deeds in favour of the petitioner’s mother-in-law, who, during her lifetime, executed a Will in favour of the petitioner, and after her death, the petitioner succeeded to the subject land and has been in possession of the same.

3.2. It is further averred that earlier, the petitioner had filed Writ Petition Nos.5781 and 11588 of 2002, which were disposed of on 03.06.2009, remanding the matter to the MRO, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, for conducting fresh enquiry; that in compliance of the said order, respondent No.5 again issued notice in Form-II vide proceedings No.B/560/2011 dated 23.06.2011 under Section 3(2) of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as ‘the POT Act’), calling upon the petitioner to explain why she should not be summarily evicted as the subject lands are assigned lands belonging to the Government; that upon receipt of the notice, the petitioner submitted her explanation stating that her mother-in-law’s vendors were in possession of the subject land since 1955–58, that Laoni permission was granted to them under Rule 9(g) of the Laoni Rules, 1950, and as such, the provisions of the POT Act are not applicable, and requested to drop of the proceedings; that without considering the explanation and the documents produced by the petitioner, respondent No.5 passed orders vide proceedings No.B/560/2011, dated 08.05.2012; that aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 4(1) of the POT Act before Respondent No.4; that respondent No.4, by order dated 28.11.2014 in File No.D/3157/2012, confirmed the order of Respondent No.5; and that aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed a Revision before Re