IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 18696 of 2006 Between: 1 M.Abdul Khader Jeelani, s/o late Jaheerulla, r/o Door No.20/133, Akula Street, kadapa Town & District. 2 M.Ghouse Mohiddin, s/o late Jahirulla, r/o Door No.9/258, Agadi Street, Kadapa Town & District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration & Stamps, A.P., Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector, kadapa, Kadapa District. 4 The Revenue Divisional Officer, kadapa, Kadapa District. 5 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Atlur Mandal, Kadapa District. 6 The Sub-Registrar, Kadapa, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the proposals forwarded by the 5th respondent vide proceedings in Ref.No.A/130/2005, dated 13-07-2006 and also the inaction on his part in not issuing "No Objection Certificate" enabling the petitioners to sell the agricultural land in an extent of Ac.2.86 cents situated in Sy.No.4/2, Rudra Bharati Peta Village, Chennur Mandal, Kadapa District, belongs to the petitioners, as highly arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the G.O.Ms.No.743, Revenue Department, dated 30-04-1963 and consequential G.O.Ms.No.1117 dated 11-11-1993, against the settled principles of legal position in the case of Shaik Bade Vs. District Collector, Visakhapatnam reported in 2006 (4) ALD 208 and violative of the Fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 & 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 5th respondent to issue "No Objection Certificate" and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.R.REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent s: GP FOR ASSIGNMENT The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No.18696 of 2006 O R D E R: It appears, the father of the petitioners was an ex- serviceman and retired after serving the Indian Army, in the year 1947- 48. He was issued with a D.K.T Patta assigning Ac.2-86 cents in Sy.No.4/2 of Rudra Bharati Peta village, Chennur Mandal, Kadapa District. He died in the year 1978. Subsequently, the petitioners have inherited the said property and they executed General Power of Attorney in favour of 3rd parties on 22.2.1995. However, since nothing happened, the said G.P.A. was cancelled and on 30.9.2005 it was revoked. When the petitioners wanted to sell the land by themselves, the 6th respondent directed them to produce ‘No-Objection Certificate’ from the concerned revenue authorities. When the petitioners approached respondent No.5 for issuance of ‘No-Objection Certificate’, he referred the matter to the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned but as of today no such certificate has been issued in favour of the petitioners and on the other hand, it was recommended for cancellation of assignment on the ground that the petitioners attempted to sell the land to 3rd parties under the G.P.A. dated 22.2.1995. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. Respondents have filed counter stating that since the petitioners have executed G.P.A. on 22.2.1995, it amounts to violation of the conditions of assignment made in favour of their father. Therefore, proposals were sent for cancellation of assignment made in favour of the father of the petitioners. Further, the father of the petitioners was not an ex-serviceman and the very assignment made in his favour was liable to be cancelled. Heard both sides. On a close examination of the papers and the material placed before this Court, it came to light that though DKT Patta was not issued to the father of the petitioners in the capacity of an ex- serviceman, the fact that the father of the petitioners was an ex- serviceman is not denied. If the patta was not granted in favour of the father of the petitioners in the capacity of ex-serviceman, under what capacity the said patta was granted is not known. Since the father of the petitioners could not be called a landless poor and he was a soldier, getting pension, it must be deemed that the DKT patta was issued in favour of the father of the petitioners on 26.6.1969 only in the capacity of ex-serviceman. Further, the name of the mother of the petitioners was granted HS DKT Patta No. 180/90 wherein the name of her husband was shown as ‘Maji-Sainikudu No.195563’. Apart from that, any amount of evidence is placed before this Court to show that the father of the petitioners was an ex-serviceman. Therefore, once the father of the petitioners was an ex-serviceman and the DKT patta was issued on 26.6.1969, such ex-serviceman or their legal heirs are entitled to sell the property after more than 10 years of the assignment. In this case, on 22.2.1995 the G.P.A. was executed in favour of 3rd party for sale of the property and it was cancelled and again revoked on 30.9.2005 it was revoked. These facts are not in dispute. Therefore, it must be presumed that the petitioners, as legal heirs, are entitled to sell the property after 10 years of its assignment in favour of their father. In this case, as noticed above, the G.P.A. was executed in the year 1995 and it was cancelled and again revoked in the year 2005. Even otherwise, the petitioners are entitled for sale of the land for the reasons stated above and, therefore, they have approached the Tahsildar concerned for issuance of ‘No- Objection Certificate’. Instead of issuing such certificate, the 5th respondent has recommended for cancellation of assignment, which is arbitrary and illegal. Under those circumstances, the proposals forwarded by 5th respondent vide proceedings in Ref.No.A/130/2005 dated 13.7.2006 are liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside. Consequently, the respondents are directed to issue ‘No-Objection Certificate’ in favour of the petitioners within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, enabling them to sell the agricultural land in an extent of Ac.2-86 cents in Sy.No.4/2 of Rudra Bharati Peta village, Chennur Mandal, Kadapa District, which was assigned in favour of the father of the petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 16-11-2009. Note: C.C. in 10 days. (BO) MVB.