Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Ch Sitarama Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 July, 2021
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
***
W.P.No.14504 of 2021
Between:
1. Ch.Sitarama Rao, S/o.Subbarao, aged 47 years,
R/o.Tarakarama Colony, Manepalli Village,
P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
2. Marredddi Satyanarayana, S/o.Sathiyya, aged 74 years,
R/o.D.No.1-80, Manepalli Village, P.Gannavaram
Mandal, East Godavari District.
3. Bonam Simhadri, S/o.Pullayya, aged 50 years,
R/o.D.No.7-30, Pedakandalapalem, Nagullanka Village,
P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
4. Gubbala Nagamani, W/o.Veera Krishna Murthy, aged 49
years, R/o.D.No.5-68, Chinakadalapalem, Manepalli
Village, P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
... Petitioners
And
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal
Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department,
Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.
2. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department,
Rajahmahendravaram, East Godavari District.
3. Sri Anandeswara Malleswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam,
Rep.by its Executive Officer, Manepalli Village,
P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
... Respondents
Date of Judgment pronounced on : 28-07-2021
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes/No
May be allowed to see the judgments?
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked : Yes/No
to Law Reporters/Journals:
3. Whether the Lordship wishes to see the fair copy : Yes/No
Of the Judgment?
2
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
* HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
+ W.P.No.14504 of 2021
% Dated: 28-07-2021
1. Ch.Sitarama Rao, S/o.Subbarao, aged 47 years,
R/o.Tarakarama Colony, Manepalli Village,
P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
2. Marredddi Satyanarayana, S/o.Sathiyya, aged 74 years,
R/o.D.No.1-80, Manepalli Village, P.Gannavaram
Mandal, East Godavari District.
3. Bonam Simhadri, S/o.Pullayya, aged 50 years,
R/o.D.No.7-30, Pedakandalapalem, Nagullanka Village,
P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
4. Gubbala Nagamani, W/o.Veera Krishna Murthy, aged 49
years, R/o.D.No.5-68, Chinakadalapalem, Manepalli
Village, P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
... Petitioners
And
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal
Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department,
Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.
2. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department,
Rajahmahendravaram, East Godavari District.
3. Sri Anandeswara Malleswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam,
Rep.by its Executive Officer, Manepalli Village,
P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.
... Respondents
! Counsel for petitioner : Ponnada Sree Vyas
^Counsel for Respondents 1 & 2 : G.P. for Endowments
^Counsel for Respondent No.3 : K.Madhava Reddy
<GIST :
>HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred:
1. 2018 (5) ALD 247
2. 2018 (4) ALT 655
3
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.14504 of 2021
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners 1 to 4.
These four petitioners are claiming that they are landless poor
persons. The 3rd respondent temple is now seeking to auction
the leasehold rights of the lands held by these petitioners as
lessees of the 3rd respondent-temple.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that since they are
landless poor persons, the 3rd respondent cannot auction the
leasehold rights of the lands held by them and that they should
be continued as lessees in accordance with the proviso to
Section 82(2) of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious
Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short "the Act").
3. Heard Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing
Counsel for 3rd respondent.
4. A perusal of the material placed before this Court
would show that the 2nd petitioner has been recognized as a
landless poor person by proceedings of the Assistant
Commissioner, Endowments, Rajahmundry on 31.03.2005. As
such, he would be entitled to the benefit of the proviso to
Section 82 of the Act and an extent of Ac.1.96 cents of wet land
in R.S.No.410/5 of Manepalli Village, P.Gannavaram Mandal,
East Godavari District held by him, as lessee of the 3rd
respondent, cannot be put to auction.
5. As far as the 3rd petitioner is concerned, the said
petitioner has not been recognized as a landless poor person in
accordance with the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious
Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules,
2003 (for short 'the Agricultural Land Rules'). The petitioners 1
and 4 claim to be the descendents of persons who have been
recognized as landless poor persons, in accordance with the A.P.
Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments
Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003.
6. Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that 3rd petitioner meets all the
requirements of a landless poor person and the only defect in
his status is that necessary certification has not been obtained
at the appropriate time. He further submits that petitioners 1
and 4 would also be entitled to the benefit of the status of a
landless poor person, as they are the legal heirs of persons, who
have already been recognized as landless poor persons. He
further submits that Rule 9 (f) and Proviso to Rule 3(3) of
the Agricultural Lands Rules, stipulate that once a person is
recognized as a landless poor person, his status cannot be
altered except by way of a review by the concerned Assistant
Commissioner of Endowments. In the present case, since no
such review has been conducted, the status of the ancestors of
petitioners 1 and 4 remains that of landless poor persons and
petitioners 1 and 4 are entitled for all the benefits available to
their ancestors.
7. Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for
3rd respondent would submit that Rule 9(f) has been amended
by way of G.O.Ms.No.425 dated 09.11.2015 whereby it was
stipulated that where leases are held by landless poor persons,
the lease granted to such landless poor persons can be held by
legal heirs for the balance period whenever such landless poor
persons pass away during the currency of any lease.
8. In the circumstances, he submits that the
petitioners can, at best, be entitled for the balance period of the
lease given in favour of the deceased landless poor person. He
also relies upon Rule 8 of the Agricultural lands Rules, 2003
which states that no lease shall be granted for a period beyond
three years and contends that the scheme of the Act and Rules
is to grant lease of Agricultural Lands to landless poor persons
recognized under Rule 3 for three years, which is to be renewed
every three years. In such circumstances, petitioners 1 and 4
would at best have been entitled to continue the lease for the
balance period after the demise of the landless poor person, who
was holding the lease.
9. They would not be entitled for any continuation of
subsequent leases.
Consideration of the Court:
10. Section 82(2) and the proviso to Section 82(2) has
been considered by the erstwhile High Court of A.P in Merla
Venkateswara Rao v. Regional Joint Commissioner, Multi
Zone-I, Endowment Department and Ors.,1 Bandela Peda
Satyam v. Regional Joint commissioner, Midti Zone-I,
Endowment Department, Kakinada and Ors.,2 wherein it was held
that only the persons who were in actual possession of the lands
as lessees of the Endowment Institutions at the time of the act
coming into force would be entitled for the benefit of being
declared as landless poor persons. I am in respectful agreement
with the said judgment. However, I propose to supplement this
judgment.
11. The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious
Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 was brought in for the
purpose of better management of the properties of the
institutions and endowments and consequent utilisation of
funds. The statement of objects and reasons also set out this
requirement. One of the features of the Act was the termination
of all leases of agricultural lands by way of Section 82 (2) of the
Act. This provision terminated all leases subsisting on the date
of commencement of the Act. As this termination of all leases
would drastically affect the livelihood of landless poor persons, a
provision was made to protect these persons and to provide
these persons with an opportunity to purchase the lands, which
were being cultivated by them as lessees of the religious
institutions. Section 82(2) of the Act provides, these landless
poor persons, an opportunity to purchase the lands, which were
being cultivated by them, at the prevailing market value subject
2018 (4) ALT 655
2018 (5) ALD 247
to the condition that the landless poor persons were in
possession of these lands for at least six continuous years prior
to the enactment of the Act. In the year 2002 a proviso was
added to Section 82(2) of the Act by way of Act 27/2002, with
effect from 26.08.2002, providing for continuation of leases of
such persons, where these persons are unable to purchase the
land.
12. Once the provision of Section 82 of the Act is read in
the background of these events, it would be clear that the
protection granted to the landless poor tenants of religious
institutions is a one time affair and the benefit of the right to
purchase the land is also a one time affair. A significant feature
of Section 82 and the proviso is that every landless poor person
is not automatically given the right either to purchase the land
or to continue as a tenant by virtue of the proviso. The
requirement is that a person should first be recognised as a
landless poor person and thereafter only those landless poor
persons, who were in possession of the land for a period of six
years prior to the coming into force of the Act, would be entitled
to the benefits of Section 82 (2) or the proviso therein and would
be entitled to either to purchase the land at the market value or
to continue as tenants.
13. Initially, Section 82(2) of the Act only gave a right to
the landless poor tenants to purchase the land. There was no
provision of continuing these persons as lessees, if they choose
not to purchase the land in their possession or were unable to
do so due to lack of financial resources. The legislature by way
of an amendment, introduced the proviso to Section 82(2) of the
Act in the year 2002 to give these persons the additional benefit
of being allowed to continue as lessees of the religious
institutions on payment of 2/3 of the market rent payable for
such lands.
14. The procedure for the said recognition was set out
under Rule 3 of the Agricultural Lands Rules, which came into
effect in the year 2003. Rule 3 of the Rules reads as follows:
Rule 3: Determination of Landless Poor
Person:-
(1) Immediately after coming into force of these
rules, if any cultivating tenant claims to be
a landless poor person, the Assistant
Commissioner having territorial Jurisdiction
shall enquire into and decide whether the
cultivating tenant is a landless poor person
as defined in Section 82 after giving a
reasonable opportunity to the cultivating
tenant and to the Executive Authority of the
concerned institution or Endowment.
(2) If the cultivating tenant does not claim to be
a landless poor person or if the Assistant
Commissioner concerned determines that
the cultivating tenant is not a landless poor
person, the tenancy will be deemed to have
been cancelled with effect from 28.05.1987
and the cultivating tenant shall be regarded
as a tenant holding over thereafter.
(3) ..............
15. Under these provisions, the application for
determination has to be made immediately after the Rules came
into force. This would also go to show that the recognition of the
status of a landless poor person was a one time affair and not a
continuous process that would be applicable even for persons
who would otherwise qualify as landless poor persons, where
such persons obtain leases of endowment land subsequent to
the Endowments Act coming into force or the Agricultural Land
Rules 2003.
16. The act is silent as to the rights of descendents of
such persons in relation to the status of landless poor persons.
Rule 9(f) of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 throws some light on
the manner in which legal heirs to the landless poor persons are
to be dealt with under the provisions of the Act and Agricultural
Lands Rules, 2003. The said Rule 9(f), after amendment by way
of G.O.Ms.No.425, Rev.(Endt.I) Dept., dated 09.11.2015 reads
as follows:
"The lease is not transferable. However, in the event of
the death of the lessee, with the prior permission of the
Executive Authority; his legal heirs may enjoy the lease
for the balance period on the same terms. The lessee
cannot grant a sublease and if granted, it shall be
regarded as void. However, in exceptional circumstances,
where landless poor persons are actual cultivators of the
land, the particulars have to be recorded in the temple
land records so as to recognize them as lessees for the
balance period".
17. This Rule stipulates that where a landless poor
person dies during the currency of a lease, the said lease would
be continued in favour of the legal heirs of the said landless
poor persons for the remaining term of the said lease.
18. The question that would arise is whether the lease
available to the landless poor person would be an unlimited
lease in terms of time, or it would be limited by time. The
proviso of Section 82(2) is silent regarding the period of the
lease. However, Section 82(3) stipulates that the lease granted
to any person, shall be as may be prescribed. The said
prescription is found in Rule 8 of the Agricultural Lands Rules,
2003 which states that no lease shall be granted for a lease
exceeding three years and in the event of any lease granted
beyond that period, prior permission of the Commissioner would
be necessary. This would make it clear that the term of any
lease granted to a lessee in relation to agricultural land
belonging to religious institutions cannot cross three years,
unless specific prior permission is obtained from the
Commissioner of Endowments, even before the publication of
any notice relating to the auction of such leasehold rights.
19. A conspectus of the above statutory regime clearly
shows that a landless poor person recognized under Rule 3 of
the Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003, would be entitled to
continue as a lessee in the lands in his possession, subject to
the condition that he continues to retain the status of a landless
poor person. The said status would be subject to review by the
concerned Assistant Commissioner for Endowments every three
years.
20. As long as the landless poor person continues as a
landless poor person, he continues as a lessee of the endowment
institution subject to payment of 2/3rd of the market rent, which
is to be determined from time to time. This lease would have to
be taken to be a three year lease which is to be reviewed at the
end of every three years. It is significant that the review of the
status of the landless poor person is also fixed at the end of
every three years. This period appears to have been fixed so
that it would be open to the authorities to verify whether the
landless poor person is still to be continued in that status at the
end of every three years to enable the authorities to take
necessary steps in the event of such a person being found to
exceed either in his income or the land held by him as
stipulated under the Rules and the provisions of Section 82 of
the Endowments Act.
21. As far as, the descendents of said landless poor
persons are concerned, both the Act and the Rules are silent as
to whether such descendants would inherit the status of
landless poor person and would be entitled to the benefits of
such a status.
22. In the absence of any provision in the Act and Rules,
it becomes a matter to deduction from the existing Rules.
Rule 9(f) as extracted above, now stipulates that the legal heir of
a landless poor person who passes away during the currency of
any three year period of lease would be entitled to continue the
lease till the end of the lease period. This rule, by implication, is
restricting the right of a legal heir of a landless poor person to
be entitled to the benefit of such lease only to the extent of the
lease period and not thereafter.
23. This can only lead to the conclusion that legal heirs
of a landless poor person will not inherit the status of a landless
poor person nor be entitled to any of the benefits to such
landless poor persons under the provisions of the Act and the
Rules.
24. In these circumstances, petitioners 1, 3 and 4 would
not be entitled for the benefit of being declared as landless poor
persons or be extended any of the benefits available to such
persons under Section 82 of the Act and the Rules.
25. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in favour of
petitioner No.2 who has been declared as a landless poor person
and the auction of the leasehold rights of the land held by the
2nd petitioner as lessee, if it has been conducted, is set-aside
and the 2nd petitioner shall be entitled to be continued as lessee
of the land held by him subject to the provisions of the Act and
the Rules.
26. The Writ Petition stands dismissed against the
petitioners 1, 3 and 4 for the reasons set out above.
27. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed.
There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending
miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
28.07.2021
RJS/Js
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.14504 of 2021
28.07.2021
RJS
