Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Pitta Vijayasimha Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 21 January, 2025
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
1
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
APHC010409722019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3508]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT APPEAL NO: 455/2019
Between:
The Sub Registrar ...APPELLANT
AND
P Amrutha and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant:
1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS (AP)
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1 GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
.
2 SODUM ANVESHA
.
APHC010069382020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI (3508)
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
2
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT APPEAL NO: 154/2020
Between:
The State Of Ap and Others ...APPELLANT(S)
AND
P Amrutha and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. SODUM ANVESHA
APHC010135952024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3508]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 7194/2024
Between:
Pitta Vijayasimha Reddy, and Others …PETITIONER(S)
AND
3
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batchThe State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others …RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. P S P SURESH KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following Judgment:
(per Hon‟ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
As all the two Writ Appeals and the Writ Petition relate to the same facts
and the same subject matter, they are being disposed of, by way of a common
order.
2. Heard Sri P. Veera Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel
representing Smt. S. Anvesha, appearing for respondent No.1 in W.A.Nos.455
of 2019 and154 of 2020, Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel,
appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.7194 of 2024 and the learned
Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the appellants in W.A.No.154
of 2020 and 455 of 2019 and for respondents in W.P.No.7194 of 2024.
3. The 1st respondent is said to be the owner and possessor of land
admeasuring Ac.0.31 cents in Sy.No.279/1, Ac.0.12 cents in Sy.No.288/1,
Ac.0.17 cents in Sy.No.292/1, Ac.0.26 cents in Sy.No.296/1, Ac.0.27 cents in
Sy.No.304/1, Ac.0.12 cents in Sy.No.305/1, Ac.0.10 cents in Sy.No.306/1,
Ac.0.02 cents in Sy.No.307/4, and Ac.0.17 cents in Sy.No.309/1, aggregating
to Acs.1.54 cents. This land was originally the property of Sri Hathiramji Mutt.
This Mutt is said to have granted a permanent patta in favour of the vendor of
4
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
the 1st respondent, on 25.03.1939. Subsequently, the vendor of the 1st
respondent sought ryotwari patta, under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh
(Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 and
the then Inams Deputy Tahsildar, Chandragiri issued proceedings in
I.E.No.303/77, dated 20.12.1980, granting ryotwari patta to the vendor of the
1st respondent for the extent of Ac.1.54 cents and another extent of Ac.0.16
cents. After the grant of the said ryotwari patta, the vendor of the 1 st
respondent sold it to the 1st respondent under a registered deed of sale, dated
19.12.1981, registered as Document No.7376/1981.
4. The 1st respondent sought to execute a deed of settlement, in
favour of her son, on 01.09.2017 and approached the Sub-Registrar,
Renigunta, for a market value certificate for the purpose of paying stamp duty
on the document. However, the Sub-Registrar issued an endorsement, on
01.09.2017 itself, that the said land is classified as „Government land‟ and no
document can be presented for registration purpose. On verification, the 1st
respondent came to know that the property is not included in the list of
prohibited properties, maintained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act.
Aggrieved by the refusal of the Sub-Registrar to register the settlement deed,
the 1st respondent had approached the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, by
way of W.P.No.30085 of 2017. This Writ Petition was dismissed, on
08.09.2017. However, liberty was given to 1st respondent to submit an
5
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
application to the District Collector for allowing the 1st respondent to execute
necessary settlement deed. The 1st respondent, on the strength of the order of
the High Court, dated 08.09.2007, had filed an application, on 23.09.2017,
seeking a no objection certificate. As no orders were passed on this
application, the 1st respondent approached the erstwhile High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra
Pradesh again, by way of W.P.No.40979 of 2017, for a direction to the
authorities to dispose the application of the 1st respondent and for a direction
to the Sub-Registrar to receive, process and register the gift settlement deed.
5. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, proceedings were
issued by the District Collector, on 02.03.2018 rejecting the request of the 1st
respondent. The prayer in the Writ Petition was amended to include a
challenge to the order of rejection and the matter was taken up for
consideration by a learned single Judge of the erstwhile High Court.
6. The contention of the revenue authorities, before the learned
Single Judge, was that the ryotwari patta, issued in favour of the vendor of the
petitioner, could not have been given and all such ryotwari pattas had already
been cancelled by the Commissioner, Survey Settlement and Land Records.
A learned Single Judge after verifying the endorsement and proceedings of
the Commissioner, Survey Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad, placed
before him, had held that the orders of cancellation do not relate to the
6
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
present case and the said order of cancellation would not have any effect on
the right and title of the 1st respondent.
7. The District Collector also took the defense that the land which is
sought to be registered, was within “Kaluva” land and no ryotwari patta can be
issued, in respect of such land. The learned Single Judge after considering
this contention, rejected it on the ground that the ryotwari patta granted to the
vendor of the 1st respondent, by the Inam Deputy Tahsildar, Chandragiri had
not been challenged and is till subsisting. The learned Single Judge was of the
view that, as long as the ryotwari patta remains in force, there can be no
ground on which the request of the petitioner can be rejected. On the basis of
these findings, the learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition with costs
and a direction to the Sub-Registrar to register the gift settlement deed,
executed by the 1st respondent, in favour of her son. Aggrieved by this order,
dated 31.12.2018, of the learned Single Judge, the present W.A.No.154 of
2020 was filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh and the District Collector and
other revenue authorities. W.A.No.455 of 2019 came to be filed by the Sub-
Registrar against whom directions had been issued.
8. W.P.No.7194 of 2024 came to be filed by persons claiming to be
purchasers of the land which had belonged to the 1st respondent in the Writ
Appeal.
7
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
9. The contention of the learned Government Pleader is that the
land in question is actually “kaluvaporamboke” consisting of a water channel
between two tanks. He would submit that no patta could be granted in relation
to the said water channel and blockage of the said water channel, under the
guise of the ryotwari patta, would lead to ecological difficulties in the area. The
learned Government Pleader would also contend that the officer who had
issued the ryotwari pattas had manipulated various records and had issued
fake pattas to people, who were not entitled to such pattas. The learned
Government Pleader who would contend that, it is on that account that, the
Commissioner, Land Administration had set aside similar orders passed by
the said officer. The learned Government Pleader would contend that a similar
situation arises in the present case and the ryotawaripatta, said to have been
granted by the said officer, cannot be accepted to be genuine or correct. The
learned Government Pleader has taken this Court through the fair adangals of
Tiruchanuru Village and more specifically the entries relating to the aforesaid
survey numbers. The said adangal shows that the land in survey numbers in
question to be categorized as “Kaluvaporamboke” and “Government Land”.
He would submit that in such circumstances, no ryotwari patta can be granted
for these lands as no ryotwari patta can be granted in relation to
“Kaluvaporamboke” land.
10. Sri P. Veera Reedy, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for
Smt. S. Anvesha and Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar who is appearing for the
8
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
subsequent purchasers of land have both vehemently contended that the land
in question is not “kaluvaporamboke” land and in any event, there is no
existing water channel in the said area. It is submitted by them, that the
revenue authorities, by raising the bogey of a water body are seeking to take
away the vested rights of the 1st respondent in the Writ Appeals and the
petitioners in the Writ Petition who are seeking to claim through her.
11. Section 2-A of the Inams Abolition Act reads as follows:
[2A. Transfer to, and vesting in the Government of all communal
lands, porambokes etc., in inamlands – Notwithstanding anything
contained in this Act all communal lands and porambokes, grazing
lands, waste lands, forest lands, mines and quarries, tanks, tank
beds and irrigation works, streams and rivers, fisheries and ferries in
the inam lands shall stand transferred to the Government and vest in
them free of all encumbrances]
12. This provision prohibits grant of ryotwari patta in communal land,
which would include “Kaluvaporamboke” land.
13. The case of the revenue authorities is that the land in question is
a water body which amounts to communal lands. Sri P.Veera Reddy as well
as Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar would contend that there is no water body or
water channel in the area and in any event the ryotwari patta given in favour of
the vendor of the 1st respondent, in the Writ Appeals, has not been set aside
till date. Further, the learned Single Judge had specifically observed that the
contentions raised by the revenue authorities cannot be looked into while the
ryotwari patta continues to remain in force.
9
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
14. While, no ryotwari patta could have been granted, in communal
lands, the question of whether such lands are communal lands and whether
there is any water body or a water channel in the said land is a question of
fact which cannot be ascertained by this Court in writ proceedings. However,
such an issue can be considered by the revenue authorities after a physical
inspection of the said land.
15. In the circumstances, the Writ Appeals and the Writ Petition are
disposed of with a direction to the revenue authorities to conduct a survey and
enquiry, for ascertaining the nature of the land, both in the revenue records as
well as on a physical inspection of the land. Needless to say, this inspection
and survey is to be conducted after due notice is given to the 1st respondent in
the Writ Appeals, as well as the petitioners in the Writ Petition, to set forth
their case. Upon such verification being conducted, the revenue authorities
will take a decision as to whether subsequent transfers can be permitted or
not.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________________
JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
____________________________________
JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
RJS
10
RRR,J& MRK,J
W.A.455 of 2019 & batch
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
&
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT APPEAL NOs: 455 of 2019, 154 of 2020 & W.P.No.7194 of 2024
(per Hon‟ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Dt: 21.01.2025
RJS
[ad_1]
Source link