Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Gangavaram Sunil Kumar on 17 September, 2024
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010228892018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3488]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT APPEAL No.596 OF 2018
Between:
The State of Andhra Pradesh
Rep. by its Prl. Secretary (Revenue)
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District
And three others. ...Appellants
AND
Gangavaram Sunil Kumar ...Respondent
Counsel for the appellants: Ld. Government Pleader
For Assignment
Counsel for Respondent: Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalva
The Court made the following judgment:
(Per Hon'ble RRR, J)
1. One Sri P.B.Khan, while serving in the Indian Army, was
assigned Ac.2.68 cents of land in Sy. No.747 of
Kothavaripalli Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor
District, vide proceedings dated 28.05.1973. The said
17.09.2024
assignment was permissible as per G.O.Ms. No.743
Revenue (B) Department dt.30.04.1963. After the
demise of the said assignee, his widow who inherited the
property filed an application in 2007 to grant N.O.C. for
selling the property. On 18.10.2007 the Tahsildar,
Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, permitted her to
sell the property. On this basis, the widow of the original
assignee sold the said land under a registered sale deed
dated 20.10.2007 to the respondent herein. After the said
sale, the revenue authorities accepted the sale, mutated
the land in favour of the respondent in the revenue
records and issued necessary pattadar passbooks and
title deeds. At that stage, the Tahsildar, Madanapalle
Mandal, Chittoor District, issued a show cause notice
dated 16.10.2017 under the A.P. Assigned Lands
(Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 [for short 'the Act,
1977'] on the ground that the land had been assigned to
the original assignee under 'Normal Darakasthu Rules'
and as such, alienation of the property was a violation of
the patta conditions.
17.09.2024
2. Aggrieved by the said show cause notice, the respondent
approached this Court by filing W.P. No.38641 of 2017. A
learned single Judge of this Court, by his order, dated
17.11.2017, had allowed the writ petition, holding that the
assignment of land to the assignee would have to be
treated as assignment to an Ex-serviceman, under
G.O.Ms. No.743 and consequently alienation of the
property would not violate the patta conditions, attracting
the provisions of the Act, 1977. Aggrieved by the said
order, the State as well as the revenue authorities have
filed the present appeal.
3. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue would
contend that though the original assignee was serving in
the Indian Army, at the time of assignment, the
assignment of the land would have to be treated as
assignment under 'Normal Darakasthu Rules'. He
submits that the provisions of G.O.Ms. No.743 required
the servicemen/Ex-servicemen to file his application after
obtaining necessary discharge certificate from the
commanding officer of the unit in which he was last
serving. He would submit that since such a procedure
17.09.2024
was not followed, the assignment of land would have to
be treated as an assignment under 'Normal Darakasthu
Rules'. He further submits that in such a situation, there
would be a condition of non-alienation which cannot be
violated. As there has been alienation of the property,
the provisions of the Act, 1977 would apply and the
issuance of the notice is proper.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent has placed a
judgment, dated 29.08.2019, in W.A. No.147 of 2019
where, a Division Bench of this Court, in a similar case,
had permitted alienation of assigned land by Ex-
servicemen. In the said judgment, another judgment of a
Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of
Andhra Pradesh, dated 29.08.2018, in W.A. No.1029 of
2017, was cited with approval. The following extract of
the judgment of the Division Bench, in W.A. No.1029 of
2017, would set at rest the present controversy.
"Once the assignment is admitted, the
distinction now sought to be introduced namely,
that the assignment made in favour of
petitioners 1 and 2 is not under the category of
Ex-servicemen, but DKT assignment, is
17.09.2024
unacceptable. The reason being, a person
either drawing pension or salary does not
satisfy the eligibility criteria for assignment of
Government land. Therefore, once assignment
is made such persons drawing pension means,
their cases have been considered under Ex-
servicemen quota. The explanation carved out
in favour of Ex-servicemen is that after they
retired from service by considering their status
of working in the armed forces assignment was
made."
5. In view of the ratio laid down in W.A. No.1029 of 2017,
the contention of the learned Government Pleader for
Revenue would fail.
6. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed without costs.
7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ appeal
shall stand closed.
________________________
R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
______________
HARINATH.N, J
BV
