THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY
WRIT PETITION No. 17445 of 2020
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in demolishing the compound wall of the petitioner School on 01.10.2020 to an extent of Acs.0.27 guntas in Survey Nos.139, 140 and 141 of Somidi Village, Kazipet Mandal, Warangal Urban District, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents not to enter into the lands of the petitioner School.
The case of the petitioner - St. Gabriel's High School, in brief, is that it was established in the year 1955 by the Brothers of St.Grabriel Educational Society (in short 'Society') for the purpose of imparting education to the students. The Society is the owner of the lands, admeasuring Acs.40.70 guntas in Survey Nos.139, 140 and 141 of Somidi Village, Kazipet Mandal, Warangal Urban District, having purchased the same under various sale deeds and the Society is in possession of the same. While so, in the year 1984, a requisition was made to the respondent No.1 for providing playground to the petitioner School. Based on the said requisition, the land acquisition proceedings were initiated for acquiring the lands for the benefit of the petitioner. The Land Acquisition Officer has passed an Award on 19.12.1983 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3.50 paise per square yard. On reference, the Principal Subordinate Judge, Warangal, vide judgment and decree dated 24.09.1987 in O.P.No.10 of 1984 had enhanced the market value of the acquired land to Rs.20/-
2 AAR, J
W.P. No.17445 of 2020
per square yard, and the same was confirmed by this Court in A.S.No.1829 of 1988 vide judgment dated 08.11.2005. Accordingly, the petitioner had paid the compensation to the respective land owners. During the interregnum period, proceedings were initiated by the then State of Andhra Pradesh in L.G.C.No.120 of 1999 against one Bro. John Kalarkal, the then Principal of the petitioner School, and the said L.G.C. was disposed by judgment dated 22.04.2003 holding that the respondent - Bro. John Kalarkal was a land grabber and he was directed to deliver vacant possession of the subject property of L.G.C. to the applicant. However, it is stated that Bro. John Kalarkal had no independent right, title or interest in the land, which is the subject matter of L.G.C., and the land admeasuring Acs.40.70 guntas belongs to the petitioner only as the sale deeds are in favour of the petitioner. It is further stated that the petitioner had constructed a building consisting of Ground + one floor in the land purchased by it and running the school therein. Respondent No.5 is also collecting property tax from the petitioner regularly.
While so, the respondent No.1 initiated proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, 'the Act') for acquisition of lands to an extent of Ac.2.13 guntas in Survey Nos.139, 140/1, 141/1 and 142 for the purpose of second ROB between Hanamkonda-Kazipet at 163 km 133/4 to 134/2 and Railway Km 365/31-33 of Kazipet-Ballarsha Section in Warangal (urban) District.
3 AAR, J
W.P. No.17445 of 2020
An extent of Ac.0.27 guntas of land belonging to the petitioner was also included in the said land acquisition.
It is further stated that the respondent No.3 vide Memo dated 28.09.2020 has rejected the claim of the petitioner for payment of compensation in respect of Ac.0.22 guntas of land and the said Memo was served on the petitioner on 30.09.2020. However, on 28.09.2020 itself, the authorities, with the help of police officials, tried to demolish the compound wall of the petitioner School and the same was resisted by the petitioner. Again, on 01.10.2020, the respondent authorities, without issuing any prior notice to the petitioner, have high handedly demolished the portion of the compound wall of the petitioner School. Assailing the same, the present writ petition is filed.
The respondent No.3 - the Revenue Divisional Officer-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Warangal, had filed a counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 mainly contending that pursuant to the judgment dated 22.04.2003 passed in L.G.C.No.120 of 1999, the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Hanamkonda, had taken over the possession of the subject lands i.e., an extent of Ac.0.25 guntas equivalent to 3025 sq. yards in Survey No.139 and an extent of Ac.0.09 guntas equivalent to 1089 sq. yards in Survey No.140, totally admeasuring Ac.0-34 guntas, under a cover of panchanama on 04.08.2004 and ever since then, the lands are vested with the Government. It is further stated that proceedings were initiated under the Act for acquisition of land to an extent of Acs.2.23 guntas 4 AAR, J W.P. No.17445 of 2020 for the purpose of second ROB between Hanamkonda -Kazipet on NH 163. Out of the said extent of Ac.2.23 guntas of land, Ac.1.32 guntas of land is situated in Somidi Village, including the subject land i.e., Ac.0.16 guntas in Survey No.139, Ac.0.06 guntas in Survey No.140/2, Ac.0.05 guntas in Survey No.141/1, and Ac.1.05 guntas in Survey No.142. But, the petitioner has not filed any objections within the stipulated time for the acquisition of the land. It is specifically stated that the Land Acquisition Officer has passed an Award in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0.05 guntas only in Survey No.141/1 for compensation. However, no Award was passed in respect of Ac.0.22 guntas of land since it is government land. In reply to the representation of the petitioner dated 24.08.2020, Memo dated 28.09.2020 has been issued informing that the claim of the petitioner for payment of compensation in respect of the land in Survey No.139 to an extent of Ac.0.16 guntas and in Survey No.140 to an extent of Ac.0.06 guntas, total to an extent of Ac.0.22 guntas, is rejected as the said land is classified as Khareej Khata (Government Land) in the Revenue Records, and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for compensation in respect of the said land. The District Collector, Warangal Urban, has approved the draft Award in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.0.05 guntas in Survey No.141/1 @ Rs.20,500/- per Square Yard, amounting to Rs.1,24,02,500/- vide proceedings dated 31.07.2019. Accordingly, Award was passed on 05.08.2019 and bills were also prepared and submitted to Projects & Works, PAO, Chinthagattu, on 28.07.2020 vide Bill Token No.832820 5 AAR, J W.P. No.17445 of 2020 dated 28.07.2020. It is specifically asserted that till the compensation is paid to the petitioner in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.0.05 guntas in Survey No.141/1, the possession will not be taken and handed over to the requisition department. Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
A reply has been filed by the petitioner denying the material allegations made in the counter affidavit and stating that mere entries in the Revenue Records that the lands to an extent of Ac.0.16 guntas in Survey No.139 and an extent of Ac.0.06 guntas in Survey No.140 are government lands and the same cannot be taken as the sole criteria to confer title on the respondents. The panchanama dated 04.08.2004, which was drafted while taking physical possession of the lands pursuant to the orders passed in L.G.C. was also denied and it is specifically stated that the petitioner is in possession of the said lands. The factum of the petitioner participating in the award enquiry on 25.02.2019 and passing of award by the respondents on 05.08.2019 is also denied by the petitioner. Thus, it is prayed to allow the writ petition.
Heard Sri M.V. Suresh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for respondent Nos.1 to 4, and Ms.Pingali Lakshmi, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5. Perused the material on record.
As seen from the record, the subject matter of the writ petition is an extent of Ac.0.22 guntas, in respect of which, the claim of the petitioner for payment of compensation was rejected. An extent of 6 AAR, J W.P. No.17445 of 2020 Ac.2.13 guntas of land, which was sought to be acquired, was notified under Section 11 of the Act. As per Form-C Notification, the land of the petitioner i.e., Ac.0.16 guntas in Survey No.139, Ac.0.06 guntas in Survey No.140/1 (wrongly shown as Survey No.140/1 instead of Survey No.140/2 as per the counter affidavit filed by the official respondents) and Ac.0.05 guntas in Survey No.141/1, totally admeasuring Ac.0.27 guntas was also notified. The respondent No.3 vide Memo dated 28.09.2020 has rejected the claim of the petitioner insofar as Ac.0.22 guntas of land i.e, Ac.0.16 guntas in Survey No.139 and Ac.0.06 guntas in Survey No.140. However, according to the petitioner, the official respondents have agreed to pay compensation in respect of Acs.0.05 guntas of land in Survey No.141/1. Even though the petitioner has stated that it is the owner of Ac.40.70 guntas of land in Survey Nos.139, 140 and 141 of Somidi Village, the petitioner has not produced any evidence in support of the same. Furthermore, the petitioner is mainly relying on the judgment dated 08.11.2005 passed by this Court in A.S.No.1829 of 1988, which was filed against the judgment and decree dated 24.09.1987, passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Warangal, in O.P.No.10 of 1984. The subject matter of the said O.P. is 3630 square yards equivalent to Ac.0.30 guntas of land in Survey No.140/2 (as per the record, it should be Survey No.140/1). The said Ac.0.30 guntas of land was acquired by the Government for the benefit of the petitioner herein and it is not in dispute that the petitioner is in possession of the said land.
7 AAR, J
W.P. No.17445 of 2020
The only issue that is to be decided in the present writ petition is as to whether the petitioner is the owner of the land admeasuring Ac.0.22 guntas of land i.e., Ac.0.16 guntas in Survey No.139 and Ac.0.06 guntas in Survey No.140/2 or not ?
A perusal of the record, more particularly, the judgment dated 22.04.2003 passed by the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad, in L.G.C.No.120 of 1999 discloses that the then State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Hanamkonda, Warangal District, has filed the said L.G.C. against Bro. John Kalarkal, who was working as the Principal of the petitioner School, alleging that the said Bro. John Kalarkal had grabbed an extent of Ac.0.34 guntas of land i.e., Ac.0.25 guntas in Survey No.139 and Ac.0.09 guntas in Survey No.140. According to the applicant therein, the said land was shown as Government land in the Revenue Records. The Special Court, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary entire evidence on record, held that the Government is the owner of the said Ac.0.34 guntas of land and the respondent, Bro. John Kalarkal, is a land grabber. Pursuant to the said judgment dated 22.04.2003, the official respondents have taken possession of the said Ac.0.34 guntas of land vide panchanama dated 04.08.2004.
Once the Special Court has given judgment in favour of the Government, and the same has become final, as no appeal is filed against the said judgment, this Court sitting under Article 226 of the 8 AAR, J W.P. No.17445 of 2020 Constitution of India cannot go into the correctness or otherwise of the said judgment.
The petitioner school has taken a stand that the L.G.C. filed against Bro. John Kalarkal had nothing to do with the school and that the school was not a party to the said L.G.C. Admittedly, the judgment of the Special Court is akin to that of a Civil Court, and the judgments passed by the Special Court are in rem and not in personam. As seen from the various contentions raised by the parties, the identity of the property that is now sought to be acquired is also in dispute. Whether the land is one and the same as that was acquired earlier for the benefit of the petitioner school or a different one, and whether the land is falling in survey No.140/1 or 140/2, are all matters which a competent Civil Court can go into after the parties have let in evidence. This Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot go into all those disputed questions of fact without there being any evidence on record. The Authority constituted under Section 51 of the Act has all the necessary powers as that of the Civil Court and therefore the party can approach the said authority or the Civil Court, as they deem fit. Moreover, the petitioner has not filed any documentary proof except filing the judgment dated 10.08.1972, passed by the Subordinate Judge, Warangal, in O.P.No.39 of 1971, the judgment dated 24.09.1987 passed by the Subordinate judge, Warangal, in O.P.No.10 of 1984, and the judgment of this Court dated 08.11.2005 in A.S.No.1829 of 1988, to substantiate that the land admeasuring Ac.0.22 guntas of 9 AAR, J W.P. No.17445 of 2020 land, in respect of which the claim made by it has been rejected by the respondent No.3, is a private patta land belonging to the petitioner.
In the letter dated 24.08.2020 addressed by the Correspondent of the petitioner School to the respondent No.3-Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Warangal, it is specifically stated as under:
"The said Survey nos. have been under the possession of St. Gabriel High School management for the last 65 years and also we do have documents with regard to the survey nos. showing how the management procured/purchased this land for the purpose of play grounds."
Moreover, in view of the specific stand taken by the official respondents in their counter affidavit that an Award was already passed by the authorities on 05.08.2019 insofar as Ac.0.05 guntas of land in Survey No.141/1 is concerned, and that they are willing to pay compensation for the said extent of land to the petitioner, it is necessary to refer to Section 64 of the Act, which reads as under:
"64. Reference to Authority:--
(1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Authority, as the case may be, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the person to whom it is payable, the rights of Rehabilitation and Resettlement under Chapters V and VI or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested:
Provided that the Collector shall, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of application, make a reference to the appropriate Authority:
Provided further that where the Collector fails to make such reference within the period so specified, 10 AAR, J W.P. No.17445 of 2020 the applicant may apply to the Authority, as the case may be, requesting it to direct the Collector to make the reference to it within a period of thirty days. (2) The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the award is taken:
Provided that every such application shall be made--
(a) person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award;
(b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under Section 21, or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire:
Provided further that the Collector may entertain an application after the expiry of the said period, within a further period of one year, if he is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within the period specified in the first proviso."
In view of the aforementioned reasons, and since the petitioner failed to prove that it is the owner of Ac.0.22 guntas of land i.e., Ac.0.16 guntas in Survey No.139 and Ac.0.06 guntas in Survey No.140, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition. However, if the petitioner has any grievance insofar as the rejection of its claim in respect of Ac.0.22 guntas of land is concerned, the remedy available to it is to approach the competent authority under Section 64 of the Act and file an application along with necessary documents substantiating its claim, or to approach the competent Civil Court seeking declaration of title. In the event the petitioner files any such application under Section 64 of the Act, the authority concerned shall consider the same and pass necessary orders on its own merits and in accordance with law. Insofar as Ac.0.05 guntas of land is concerned, the official respondents are 11 AAR, J W.P. No.17445 of 2020 directed to pay compensation in respect of the said land to the petitioner before taking possession of the same.
Subject to the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________ A.ABHISHEK REDDY, J Date : 13-05-2021 sur/va