IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION NO.9461 of 2021
Between:-
D.Subramanayam .... Petitioner
And
State of Andhra Pradesh,
represented by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Secretariat,
Velagapudi, Guntur & 3 others. .... Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.Srinivasulu Kurra
Counsel for the Respondents : Learned Govt. Pleader for Revenue
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner from his agricultural land to an extent of Ac.2.00 cents situated in Sy.No.204/3A 7 3B of Jeepalem K.Kalva Village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District, for the purpose of house sites, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to Law, besides violation of Articles 14 & 300-A of the Constitution of India and for a consequential direction to the respondents to follow the due process of Law established under the Acts."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. With the consent of both the parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission. 2
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased the above said extent of land from one Anam Srinivas on 10.06.2016 and since then the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the said land. He submits that the petitioner could not get the Sale Deed registered, as the subject matter land was placed under the Prohibited List of Properties, pursuant to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh. He submits that the petitioner is maintaining Mango Thope by spending his hard earned money by digging a bore well for watering the trees. While so, the learned counsel submits that the subject matter land is stated to have been acquired for the purpose of providing house sites under Navaratnalu - Pedalandariki Illu Scheme of the State Government and the petitioner is sought to be dispossessed from the same. The learned counsel submits that the action on the part of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner without following the procedure established under Law is arbitrary, apart from violative of principles of natural justice. He submits that having left with no alternative remedy, the petitioner approached this Court seeking appropriate directions.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue on the other hand, while drawing the attention of this Court to the Counter Affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, inter alia, contends that in the year 2019, the Government decided to acquire the lands to provide house sites to the poor 3 people under the Navaratnalu - Pedalandariki Illu Scheme and in that connection notices were issued to the Pattadars on 03.03.2020. After obtaining consent of the Pattadars, the subject land was acquired by following due procedure of Law. Further, the ex gratia amount was paid to them. The learned Assistant Government Pleader specifically contends that the petitioner is not a Pattadar of the subject matter land and he has no right over the lands and the petitioner was never granted any D.K.T. Patta. The learned Assistant Government Pleader also submits that the petitioner with a view to grab the Government land filed the present Writ Petition suppressing the facts. Making the said submissions, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. In his reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the material filed along with I.A.No.2 of 2021 and submits that the petitioner had obtained electricity connections in respect of the subject matter land and using the same for the bore well dug by him.
6. This Court has considered the submissions and perused the material on record. Admittedly, the petitioner is not having any title in respect of the land in question. He claims to be in possession of the property, by virtue of an unregistered Sale Deed. Merely because the electricity connection was given in the name of the petitioner, the same cannot be treated as recognizing the right and title of the petitioner in respect of the subject 4 matter land. Further the specific averments made in the Counter Affidavit filed by the 4th respondent that the lands in question were acquired after paying compensation to the Pattadars and the specific assertion that the petitioner was never granted any patta remain uncontroverted. Therefore, this Court is not in a position to appreciate the contentions advanced by the learned counsel that the petitioner is the owner of the subject matter property. Be that as it may, even if it is treated that the petitioner is an encroacher or in unauthorized occupation of the land in question, he has to be put on notice, before resorting to any action.
7. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioner in respect of the subject matter land, without following due process of Law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date: 01.12.2022 IS 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO.9461 of 2021 Date: 01.12.2022 IS