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
