IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO. 45 OF 2007 Between: The District Collector, Hyderabad District and another ..... APPELLANTS AND S.Vasantha and another .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO. 45 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari ) This Writ appeal is filed by the respondents in W.P. No. 20766 of 2006 aggrieved by the order dated 12.12.2006 passed by a learned Single Judge allowing the same leaving it open to the writ petitioners - respondents herein to pursue the remedies open to them inclusive of a prayer for regularisation and also reserving liberty to the appellants herein to initiate any other appropriate action against the respondents, available in law, excepting summary procedure adopted by the appellants in passing the impugned order. The respondents herein filed the above Writ Petition assailing action of the second appellant herein in issuing proceedings No. B/348/06 dated 27.9.2006 and to declare that the respondents are entitled to deal with the property bearing H.No.10-3-11/P, 10-3-32/9/114P and 10-32- 9/115P by developing the same in accordance with the sanction plan of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad in Permit No. 51/97 in File No. 0837/CSC/TPT/2003 dated 21.8.2004. The writ petition had been contested by the appellants herein before the learned Single Judge contending that the land belongs to the Government and hence the impugned notice of eviction under Sec. 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act has rightly been issued to the encroachers and the respondents herein and no relief can be granted to them. The learned Single Judge after hearing both the parties and on extensive consideration of the rival contentions allowed the writ petition, which is impugned in this Writ Appeal. It is observed by the learned Single Judge that the writ petitioners have also filed OS No. 1135 of 2006 on the file of the XI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad on 28.9.2006 seeking permanent injunction in respect of the same property wherein the parties were directed to maintain status quo. However, the said suit was subsequently withdrawn. Adverting to the documents filed by the respondents before the learned Single Judge viz., copy of the final report of enquiry by the Commissioner of Land Revenue with regard to the dispute in respect of Sy.No.74 of Marredpally and 844/1 of Malkajgiri village of Hyderabad District; copy of the G.O. Ms. No. 890 Revenue (ASSN.III) Department dated 12.11.1998 regularising the occupation of the land in Sy. No.74/12 purchased in a sale conducted by the Income Tax Department and the photos showing the location of the area and the structures existing as on that day in the disputed site has observed that though it may be true that the respondents herein have come into possession recently, but their predecessors in title purchased the property in public auction on 7.2.1984 and a certificate of sale of immovable property was issued by the Tax Recovery Officer on 21.3.1984 and, as such, prima facie, the possession and title are in favour of the respondents herein. It is the case of the respondents herein that the first respondent and others have purchased the property in Sy. No. 74/8, Nehrunagar Cooperative Housing Society Limited, East Marredpally, Secunderabad, from A.S.Gopal, R.Madhava Rao and Smt. Gayatri by Agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney dated 1.2.2006 and these three persons purchased the same from one Niraj Singh Yadav and another and Income Tax Officer through registered sale deed dated 18.03.1996 and 21.3.1984. A bare reading of the order impugned in the writ petition makes it clear that the respondents herein have specifically pleaded that the summary proceedings under the Land Encroachment Act cannot be resorted to non-suit them. It is also their specific plea that they are prepared to deposit the amount for the purpose of regularisation, however, subject to the result of the writ petition. Observing so, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, as stated supra. Aggrieved thereby, the respondents in the writ petition filed the present Writ Appeal. Pending disposal of the Writ Appeal, the said A.S.Gopal, R.Madhava Rao and Smt. Gayathri, have filed WAMP No. 2329 of 2008, seeking to implead them as respondents 3,4 and 5, which is accordingly allowed. It is the case of the implead respondents that they are the owners of the property and they entered into agreement of sale-cum-General Power of Attorney with the first respondent herein and others on 1.2.2006, but since the post dated cheques which were issued towards the sale consideration were dishonoured, the said three persons filed OS No. 108 of 2007 before the I Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against the respondents for cancellation of the agreement of sale and for recovery of possession, which was subsequently compromised and a compromise decree came to be passed on 29.2.2008 in terms of the compromise. During the course of hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, filed GO Ms. No.166 Revenue (ASSN.POT) Department dated 16.2.2008, whereby the Government has approved the Policy viz., The Andhra Pradesh, Transfer of Rights to certain specified categories of Occupants of Unassigned Government Lands Policy, 2008. The papers annexed thereto show that the lands in respect of Mr. R.Madhava Rao and Smt. Gayatri for regularisation of the extents held by them had been approved while in respect of Mr.A.S.Gopal, particulars as to the basic market value particulars had been called for. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the land still vests with the Government and there are disputes inter se the parties. Under the above circumstances and in view of the policy decision arrived at by the Government in GO Ms. No.166 Revenue (ASSN.POT) Department dated 16.2.2008 approving the policy viz., The Andhra Pradesh, Transfer of Rights to certain specified categories of Occupants of Unassigned Government Lands Policy, 2008 and also in view of the contention of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue that the land in Sy. No. 74 of Marredpally Mandal, vests with the Government, we are not inclined to delve on any issue raised in the present Writ Appeal and leave it to the option of the parties to avail the remedies open to them by initiating appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum. Inasmuch as the land in respect of Mr.R.Madhava Rao and Smt. Gayatri had already been regularised pursuant to GO Ms. No. 166 dated 16.2.2008 while in respect of Mr. A.S.Gopal, the matter is still pending, we are of the considered view that no further orders are necessary in the Writ Appeal. The Writ Appeal is accordingly closed. No order as to costs. _____________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari __________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar November 3, 2009 MAS