Maddipati Suri Babu, Wg Dist 5 ... vs Prl. Secretary, Tribal Welfare ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7101 AP

             HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

                     Writ Petition No.20390 of 2017

ORDER:-


      Questioning      the   orders,   dated   21.12.2016    passed   in

S.R.A.No.42/1978/F2 by the 2nd respondent i.e., The Agent to the

Government/District Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru, the

petitioners filed the present writ petition before this Court.

This Court, by order, dated 22.06.2017 issued Rule-Nisi and

granted status-quo in W.P.MP.No.24974 of 2017.

Both the counsels requested this Court to take up the main

writ petition, as the pleadings have been completed.

2. Heard Sri P.R.K.Amarendra Kumar, learned counsel for

the petitioners as well as learned Government Pleader for Social

Welfare.

3. The dispute in the present writ petition is with regard to

the land, in an extent of Ac.24-00 cents situated in old Patta No.93,

now re-surveyed and new RS Nos.778, 779, 780 & 781 of

Kakulavarigudem, H/o Antarvedigudem, Buttaigudem Mandal, West

Godavari District.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per

the revenue records, the above land is a Zamindari land of Ex-Gutala

Zamin. Much prior to 1913, the above said land was given to one

Maddipati Venkata Swamy. The said Maddipati Venkata Swamy died

intestate leaving behind his three sons i.e., 1. Maddipati

Seetaramaiah 2. Bulli Venkayya and 3. Maddipati Brahmayya. During

family partition, the above land fell to the share of Maddipati

Brahmayya and he sold away the said property in favour of Maddipati

Seetaramaiah, under registered Sale Deed, vide Doc.621/1933 , dated

25.10.1933. The said Maddipati Seetaramaiah during his life time

partitioned all the properties and the above schedule property i.e.,

Ac.24-00 cents fell to the share of Maddipati Koteswara Rao, who is

the father of the petitioners. All these transactions took place prior

to the commencement of A.P.S.A.L.T., Reg.1/59 as amended by

Reg.1/70 i.e., 03.02.1970.

5. After commencement of Regulation 2/70 (Andhra

Pradesh Schedule Area Rytowari Settlement Act 2 of 1970), the father

of the petitioners approached the Settlement Officer, Eluru, for grant

of Settlement Patta in respect of the above land under Section 9 (3)

of the Regulation 2/1970. The Settlement Officer, after conducting

enquiry in S.R.Nos.1734/76 to 1737/76, rejected the claim of the

father of the petitioners, vide order, dated 30.07.1977. Aggrieved by

the same, the father of the petitioners filed an appeal before the

Director of Settlement of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in Appeal

No.A.P.No.22/1989-G2. The said appeal was allowed on 12.05.1995

and Ryotwari Patta was granted in favour of the father of the

petitioners.

6. As the land is situated in Agency of West Godavari

District, the Special Deputy Tahsildar (TW), filed a complaint on

behalf of the 5th respondent, before the 3rd respondent i.e., Special

Deputy Collector (TW) Eluru, stating that the petitioners, being non-

tribals, are in possession of the schedule land covered in Patta No.93

in an extent of Ac.24-00 cents situated at Kakulavarigudem, H/o

Antarvedigudem, Buttaigudem Mandal, West Godavari District. On

such complaint, the 3rd respondent initiated proceedings in S.R.No.75

of 1977. During the course of enquiry, the father of the petitioners

appeared before the 3rd respondent and submitted relevant

documents. After conducting enquiry, the 3rd respondent passed

ejectment orders, dated 06.04.1978 against the father of the

petitioners.

7. Assailing the said order of the 3rd respondent, the father

of the petitioners filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent in

S.R.A.No.42 of 1978, which was also dismissed on 31.03.1981.

Questioning the said order, the father of the petitioners filed

W.P.No.7267 of 1981, which was also dismissed by the erstwhile High

Court of Andhra Pradesh, vide order, dated 09.03.1997. Aggrieved by

the same, the father of the petitioners filed Writ Appeal No.97 of

1988. A Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh

disposed of the said Writ Appeal, vide judgment, dated 16.09.1998

setting aside the orders passed by the appellate authority and

remitted the matter back to lower appellate authority with specific

directions i.e., 1) Whether the transactions, if any, took place prior

to 1959 or subsequent to Reg.1/59 (2) if so, to what extent such

regulation is hit 3) Whether any tribal as held was in possession and

enjoyment of the said land prior to petitioners predecessors

enjoyment and possession as per the law laid down in Gaddam

Narsa Reddy and others V. Collector, Adilabad Dist., and

others (FB)1.

8. After receipt of the orders passed by the Division Bench

in Writ Appeal No.97 of 1988s, the 2nd respondent directed the 4th

respondent to conduct enquiry about the possession and enjoyment

of tribals, prior to the predecessors of the petitioners in the schedule

property. The 4th respondent i.e., Tahsildar of Buttaigudem,

conducted enquiry and submitted his report in proceedings Roc.21 of

AIR 1982 Andhra Pradesh 1 (FB)

2010 (A), dated 27.07.2011. The 4th respondent in his report

categorically stated that no tribals were in possession and enjoyment

of the land covered in R.S.Nos.778, 779, 780 and 781 of

Antharvedigudem village, prior to the possession of the predecessors

of the petitioners. But curiously, the 2nd respondent once again

passed the impugned order, dated 21.12.2016 dismissing the appeal

filed by the petitioners. During the pendency of the said appeal, the

father of the petitioners died and the petitioners were brought on

record as legal representatives of Maddipati Koteswararao, the

original appellant. Questioning the said dismissal order passed by the

2nd respondent, the petitioners filed the present writ petition before

this Court.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioners strenuously

contended that the 2nd respondent passed the impugned order

without considering any material on record or at least the report

submitted by the 4th respondent. He also contended that in the

counter-affidavit filed by the respondents at para-2, it is specifically

admitted that the above said land is a Zamindari Land of Ex-Gutala

Zamin as per revenue records and also stated that except the

registered Sale Deed, dated 25.10.1933, there are no other

transactions with regard to the above land. Moreover, no tribals were

in possession and enjoyment of the land covered in R.S.Nos.778, 779,

780 and 781 of Antharvedigudem village, prior to the possession of

the predecessors of the petitioners and prays to set aside the

impugned orders of the 2nd respondent.

10. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for

Social Welfare has vehemently opposed that the Ryotwari patta was

granted in the year 1995 i.e., after commencement of Regulation

1/1970. As such, the authorities need not rely on the said Patta.

11. Perused the entire material on record. It is admitted by

the respondent authorities that the present land is situated in survey

Nos. R.S.778, 779, 780 and 781 of Kakulavarigudem, H/o

Antarvedigudem, Buttaigudem Mandal, West Godavari District, which

is a Zamindari Land of Ex-Gutala Zamin. As seen from the records,

except the Sale Deed dated, 25.10.1933, no other transaction took

place with regard to the present land. Further, the report submitted

by the 4th respondent, dated 27.07.2011, before the 2nd respondent is

also crystal clear that no tribal was in possession and enjoyment of

the land at any point of time and the report also indicates that

predecessor of the petitioners i.e., Maddipati Venkata Swamy was in

possession and enjoyment of the land initially i.e., prior to 1913.

12. Further, as per the proposition laid in Narsareddy's

Case (Supra), Section 3 (1) of the Regulation 1 of 1959 as amended

by Regulation 1 of 1970 have no retrospective operation and do not

affect orders made prior to the said Regulation or its amendments

coming into force and the authorities under Section 3 (2) of the

Regulation have no jurisdiction to pass orders in relation to the

immovable property. Applying the said principle to the facts of the

present case, no tribals were in possession and enjoyment of the land

covered in R.S.Nos.778, 779, 780 and 781 of Antharvedigudem village,

prior to the possession of the predecessors of the petitioners. As

such, there are no contraventions of the above Regulations.

13. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the

considered opinion that the subject land is a Zamindari Land of

Ex-Gutala Zamin and no tribals were in possession and enjoyment of

the land covered in R.S.Nos.778, 779, 780 and 781 of

Antharvedigudem village, prior to the possession of the predecessors

of the petitioners. Therefore, taking into consideration all aspects

and the material available on record, this Court deems it fit to set

aside the impugned orders passed by the 2nd respondent.

14. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed

setting aside the orders passed by the 3rd respondent in S.R.No.75 of

1977, dated 06.04.1978, which was confirmed by the 2nd respondent

i.e., the Agent to the Government/District Collector, West Godavari

District, Eluru, in S.R.A.No.42/1978/F2, dated 21.12.2016,. There

shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition

shall stand closed.

_______________ K.SURESH REDDY,J 16th day of September,2022 RPD

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY

Writ Petition No.20390 of 2017

Dated: 16.09.2022

RPD