Thirri Nagaramana vs Pattaneshetti Ravi ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 820 AP

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI


    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                           &
                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA


                         WRIT APPEAL No.783 of 2022
                                           and
                       CONTEMPT CASE No.2116 of 2022
                               (Through physical mode)


WRIT APPEAL No.783 of 2022
State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue (Stamps and Registration) Department,
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, and others.
                                                           .. Appellants
       versus
Thirri Nagaramana, S/o. Thirri Appala Naidu,
aged about 44 years, Occ: Business,
R/o.D.No.3-6-72, Bojannakonda,
Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and another.
                                                         .. Respondents

CONTEMPT CASE No.2116 of 2022 Thirri Nagaramana S/o. Thirri Appala Naidu, Aged about 44 years, Occ: Business, R/o.D.No.3-6-72, Bojannakonda Gajuwaka, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and another.

.. Petitioners versus

Pattaneshetti Ravi Subhash, IAS, District Collector, Anakapalli District, (Previously Visakhapatnam District).

.. Respondent HCJ & NJS,J

C.C.No.2116 of 2022

COMMON JUDGMENT (ORAL) Dt: 13.02.2023 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Both the present writ appeal and the contempt case arise out of the

order dated 08.04.2022 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.7585

of 2022, directing the District Collector, Visakhapatnam District, to take

immediate steps to complete the process of deleting the subject property

from the list of prohibitory properties, to enable the writ petitioners to

execute the registered sale deed. While the State and its authorities preferred

the writ appeal assailing the said order of the learned single Judge, the writ

petitioners have filed the contempt case alleging non-compliance of the said

order.

2. The facts, which gave rise to the filing of the aforesaid writ petition, to

the extent relevant, are that the land admeasuring Ac.5.20 cents in

Sy.No.354/3 of Maredipudi Village, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam

District, was originally assigned to an Ex-serviceman by name D. Somulu.

After expiry of ten years' period, D. Somulu has sold the entire extent of

Ac.5.20 cents to Shaik Azeemuddin and six others, who, in turn, sold an

extent of Ac.2.80 cents therefrom (hereinafter referred to as 'the subject

land') to the writ petitioners, by way of registered sale deed dated

14.07.2016. Subsequently, the writ petitioners wanted to sell the subject

land and when they approached the office of the Sub-Registrar to know the

present market value of the subject land, it was informed to them that the

land in Sy.No.354/3 is included in the list of prohibitory properties under HCJ & NJS,J

C.C.No.2116 of 2022

Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short, 'the Act of 1908').

Questioning such inclusion, the writ petitioners preferred the writ petition and

sought for a direction for deletion of the subject land from the list of

prohibitory properties.

3. The learned single Judge, having referred to G.O.Ms.No.279 dated

04.07.2016, clauses (i) and (ii) of which would state that there shall be no

need for obtaining No Objection Certificate in all cases of assignment to Ex-

servicemen and freedom fighters in which a period of ten years has expired

and all such cases without dispute shall be deleted from the list of prohibitory

properties under Section 22-A of the Act of 1908, has disposed of the writ

petition with a direction to the District Collector to take immediate steps to

complete the process of deleting the subject land from the list of prohibitory

properties, as noted above.

4. At the hearing, learned Government Pleader appearing for the

appellants contends that the original assignee - D. Somulu is not an

Ex-serviceman and the land was assigned to him under landless poor

category but not under Ex-servicemen category and, therefore,

G.O.Ms.No.279 dated 04.07.2016 is not applicable to the subject land.

5. The above contention of the learned Government Pleader cannot be

sustained, for the reason that the issue as to whether the original assignee -

D. Somulu is an Ex-serviceman was already considered by this Court in the

earlier writ petition, being W.P.No.26489 of 2015, and was answered in the HCJ & NJS,J

C.C.No.2116 of 2022

affirmative taking note of the certification given by the authorities. The said

writ petition came to be filed when the registration authorities refused to

entertain the documents presented by the writ petitioners at the time of their

purchase, on the ground that the land is a Government land, and insisted

upon production of No Objection Certificate from the concerned authority. A

perusal of the order dated 28.04.2016 passed by the learned single Judge in

the said W.P.No.26489 of 2015 (a copy of which is available at page No.28 of

the appeal papers) would show that at paragraph No.7, it was categorically

observed that the fact that the assignee D. Somulu is an Ex-serviceman is

certified by the Tahsildar, Ankampalli, under the document filed as Ex.P3

therein. The said writ petition was allowed with a direction to the Sub-

Registrar concerned to receive the document presented by the writ

petitioners and register the same, if it is otherwise in conformity with the

provisions of the Act of 1908 and the Stamp Act, 1899 and release it to the

writ petitioners. The said order was challenged by the State by filing an

intra-court appeal, being W.A.No.1388 of 2017, with a delay of 472 days,

seeking condonation of which I.A.No.1 of 2021 was filed. In the said case,

the authorities have taken a stand that after receipt of the judgment in the

writ petition, the authorities have undertaken an enquiry and as per the

report of the Enquiry Officer, the land was not assigned under Ex-servicemen

quota. The Division Bench observed that if at all any such enquiry was to be

done, the same was required to be done earlier and not after the judgment

was delivered in the writ petition and that the authorities did not produce any HCJ & NJS,J

C.C.No.2116 of 2022

documents in support of their contention before the learned single Judge. It

was further observed that if the land was not assigned under Ex-servicemen

category but was assigned under landless poor category, the authorities

could have very well placed the same before the learned single Judge. The

Division Bench, accordingly, dismissed the delay condone application as well

as the writ appeal, vide judgment dated 23.03.2021.

6. Thus, the fact that the land was assigned to the original assignee -

D. Somulu under Ex-servicemen quota having been held proved in the earlier

proceedings before this Court, the plea taken by the appellants to the

contrary is barred by the principle of res judicata and, thus, cannot be

sustained. Considering the matter in its entirety, we are of the opinion that

the order of the learned single Judge warrants no interference and the writ

appeal is liable to be dismissed.

7. In view of the above conclusion, we hope and trust that the authorities

will comply with the order passed by the learned single Judge, by taking

immediate steps as indicated in the order, failing which the writ petitioners

would be at liberty to move fresh contempt proceedings.

8. Accordingly, while dismissing the writ appeal as devoid of merit, we

dispose of the contempt case with the above observation. No costs. Pending

miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J IBL HCJ & NJS,J

C.C.No.2116 of 2022

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

WRIT APPEAL No.783 of 2022 and CONTEMPT CASE No.2116 of 2022

(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Dt: 13.02.2023

IBL