Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Donapati Rajasekhar Reddy vs Donapati Pratap Reddy on 19 August, 2024
Author: R. Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010202602024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3493]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT APPEAL NO: 474/2024
Between:
Donapati Rajasekhar Reddy ...APPELLANT
AND
Donapati Pratap Reddy and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant:
1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
2. P NAGENDRA REDDY
The Court made the following Order:
The 1st respondent herein had approached this Court, by way of
W.P.No.15500 of 2021, being aggrieved by the inclusion of an extent of
Ac.1.78 cents in Sy.No.1009 and Ac.1.38 cents in Sy.No.1012-5 of Giddalur
Village and Mandal, Prakasam District in the dispute register being maintained
by the revenue authorities.
2. The contention of the 1st respondent was that a suit had been
filed by the appellant herein bearing O.S.No.27 of 2017 before the VI
Additional District Judge, Markapur seeking partition of the said land. The 1st
respondent further contended that the Tahsildar, Racharla Mandal, without
any notice to the 1st respondent had included these lands in the dispute
register and the same is not in accordance with law. A learned single judge of
this Court by an order dated 03.08.2021 had allowed the writ petition following
an earlier order dated 20.10.2020 in W.P.No.18940 of 2020.
3. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ appeal has been
filed by the appellant.
4. Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kaluva, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant would submit that the judgment of the learned single judge has
been passed without any opportunity being given to the appellant to set forth
his case. He would submit that there is a dispute relating to the ownership and
title of the suit land as it is now the subject matter of a suit filed for partition of
the property. He would submit that in such circumstances it is only appropriate
that the land is shown in the dispute register to ensure that such land is not
alienated by the 1st respondent herein. He would further submit that during the
pendency of the suit, the 1st respondent has already alienated the land in
question and steps are being taken in this regard by the appellant.
5. Neither the learned counsel for the appellant nor the 1st
respondent could place before this Court any statutory provision which permits
the creation of a dispute register and inclusion of lands in such dispute
register. It appears that the said dispute registers are being maintained by the
revenue authorities under various circulars issued by the Chief Commissioner
of Land Administration. One such circular bearing Ref.No.LR-II/ROR-
II/144/2021 dated 19.03.2024 has been placed before this Court. This circular
sets out the circumstances in which the lands may be placed in the dispute
register, the procedure to include lands in dispute register and the procedure
to delete the lands from the dispute register.
6. Paragraph-A of the circular states as follows:
A: Lands may be placed in the dispute register only under the following
circumstances, and under no other circumstances.
a. In Civil suits/WPs/Was where there is a direction by the competent
civil court/Hon'ble High Court, directing the Tahsildar/Collector to
place the said land in the Dispute register.
b. In the case of Title Suits, where there is a specific direction from the
Civil Court.
c. If the family members of a deceased pattadar are unable to come to
a settlement AND the Tahsildar is unable to obtain a Joint Statement
from all the family members regarding settlement of the lands of
deceased pattadar, the same may be included in dispute register. In
case of a civil court order deciding upon the succession or the family
members coming to an agreement on the division of property, the
Tahsildar shall remove such lands from the ;dispute register and
incorporate the same in the revenue records.
d. .......
e. .......
f. ........
g. ........
h. ........
7. The aforesaid instructions in the circular make it clear that lands
can be placed in the dispute register only where there is a direction, by a
competent civil Court or this Court, directing the Tahsildar/Collector to place
the lands in the dispute register. In the present case, no such direction has
been given.
8. It may be necessary for this Court to observe that the view of the
learned single judge that lands can be placed in the dispute register only after
notice under Rule 9 (c)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams
(Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 may not be correct as
lands are to be placed in the dispute register only upon specific directions of
this Court. In such circumstances, the question of giving notice before placing
the lands in the dispute register would not arise.
9. Be that as it may, this Writ Appeal is disposed of by affirming the
order of the learned single Judge, though on different grounds, and leaving it
open to the appellant to approach the civil Court for a direction to include the
lands in question in the dispute register.
10. The Civil Court may pass such orders uninfluenced by the
observations made in this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
_____________________________
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J
RJS
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
&
HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Dt: 19.08.2024
RJS
