IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 13296 of 1998 Between: 1 S.Venkataramana, S/o. Anantha Venkatarangaswami Iyengar, Hyderabad. 2 D.Satyanarayan Ravindra Raju, S/o. Janaki Rama Raju, Bhimunipatnam, Vizianagaram District. 3 Pusapati Madhava Varam, S/o. P.V.S.N.Raju, R/o. Jonnavalasa, Vizianagaram District. 4 Batlanki Venkatadri Rao, S/o. Suryaprakash Rao, Hyderabad. 5 Pusapatie Swatha, D/o.P.N.M.Raju, R/o. Jonnavalasa, Vizianagaram District. 6 P.V.S.Narasimha Raju, S/o. Late Madhava Varma, R/o. Jonnavalasa, Vizianagaram District. 7 P.Silpa, D/o.P.N.M.Raju, R/o. Jonnavalasa, Vizianagaram District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, Vizianagaram. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Parvathipuram, Vizianagaram District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Bobbili, Vizianagaram District. 4 Chodipalli Dalayya, S/o. Yerakammadora, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Gorla Seetharampuram, Bobbili H.O., Vizanagaram District. 5 Janni Ayyappa Dora, S/o. Ganganna Dora, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Gorla Seetharampuram, Bobbili H.O., Vizanagaram District. 6 Kotipalli Polanna Dora, S/o. Jammanna Dora, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Gorla Seetharampuram, Bobbili H.O., Vizanagaram District. 7 Kotipalli Ganapathi Rao, S/o. Jagganna Dora, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Gorla Seetharampuram, Bobbili H.O., Vizanagaram District. 8 Chodipalli Kamayya, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Gorla Seetharampuram, Bobbili H.O., Vizanagaram District. 9 Seedarapu Sambayya, S/o. Venkanna Dora, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Gorla Seetharampuram, Bobbili H.O., Vizanagaram District. 10 Sudarapu Pedaramanna Dora, S/o. Seetanna Dora, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 11 Seedarapu Chinaramanna Dora, S/o. Seetanna Dora, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 12 Seedarapu Venkataswami, S/o. Seetanna Dora, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 13 Pumgaru Seethanna Dora, S/o. Veerappa, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 14 Badnana Appalaswami, S/o. Bangari, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 15 Badnana Papanna Dora, S/o. Appala Swamy, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 16 Janni Raja Rao, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 17 Badnana Krishna, S/o. Appala Swamy, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 18 Taleelu Seetharam, S/o. Venkanna Dora, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 19 Taleelu Ganganna Dora, S/o. Venkanna Dora, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 20 Taleelu Krishna, S/o. Venkanna Dora, R/o. Tohakammadara Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 21 Poturaju Uma Maheswara Rao, S/o. Bapanaiah, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 22 Kodisu Paraiah, S/o. Ganganna Dora R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 23 Udduboyina Butchanna Dora, S/o. Ramanna Dora, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 24 Chakali Sambayya, S/o. Nookalu, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 25 Chakali Appayya, S/o. Gurayya, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 26 Vempali Ganga Raju, S/o. Appalaswamy, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 27 Karri Rammurthy, S/o. Venkaiah, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 28 Basava Sanyasi, S/o. Dasu, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 29 Kabturi Simhachalam, S/o. Koormi Naidu, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 30 Gullipalli Paramesu, S/o. Pothi Naiu, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 31 Kattari Appala Naidu, S/o. Appala Naidu, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 32 Chakali Sanyasi, S/o.Appayya, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 33 Gedala Jogi Naidu, S/o. Appala Naidu, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 34 Duppalapudi Satyanarayana, S/o. Swami, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 35 Mugavapu Ilayya, S/o.Guraiah, R/o. Donguru Valasa, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 36 Sambangi Polinaidu, S/o. Appala Naidu, Kasideva Valasa Post, G.S.Puram, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 37 Gedala Appala Swamy, S/o. Narayana, Kasideva Valasa Post, G.S.Puram, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 38 Gullipalli Ram Murthy, S/o. Paradesu, Kasideva Valasa Post, G.S.Puram, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 39 Gullipalli Appa Rao, S/o. Paradesu, Kasideva Valasa Post, G.S.Puram, Bobbili , Vizanagaram District. 40 Korru Satyanarayana, Ramannavalasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 41 Kitupali Bangaru Dora, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 42 Mummula Chinnapu Dora, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 43 Aradada Ram Murthy, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 44 Korlapu Gopal Rao, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 45 Korlapu Satyanarayana, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 46 Korlapu Satyanarayana, S/o. Dalan Dora, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 47 Mamidi Lakshmanna, S/o. Dalanna Dora, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 48 Korlapu Gopal Rao, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 49 Mamidi Lakshmanna, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 50 Mamidi Ramanna Dora, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 51 Mamidi Ramanna Dora, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 52 Itchipu Beemanna Dora, S/o. I.Dora, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 53 Arasoda Ramanna Dora, v Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 54 Nagara Appayya Dora, S/o. Appalaswamy, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 55 Irlangi Paramesu, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 56 Kuppa Bangaru, S/o. Guraiah, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 57 Mylapalli Tavitayya, S/o. Ramaiah, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 58 Velagudu Koonaiah, S/o. Ramaiah, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram District. 59 Singarapu Appayya, S/o. Sanyasi, Ramanna Valasa, Mallammapeta, Bobbili, Vizanagaram 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 any appropriate Writ order or direction more especially in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents by issuing "D" Form pattas in favour of Respondents 4 to 59 in S.No.75/5 belonging to the petitioners herein as wholly illegal, arbitrary, opposed to the principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction violative of Art.14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSKM} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.13296 of 1998 ORDER: The petitioners questioned the grant of D-Form patta in favour of respondents 4 to 59 in Sy. Nos.75/5, situated at Donguru Valasa, Bobbili Mandal, V izianagaram District. 2. The brief facts, as they are narrated in the affidavit, are as follows: One Chunduri Jagannadha Rao was the landholder of a large extent of about Ac.900.00 cents of land. He and his family members had alienated an extent of Ac.159.00 cents of land in favour of Kamma Prasada Rao, under a registered sale deed, dated 30-11-1966. Later, Prasada Rao alienated the said entire Ac.159.00 cents in favour of four individuals viz., 1) Marena Veerraju, under sale deed, dated 29-12-1971, admeasuring Ac.39.00 cents. 2) Mummareddi Venkata Raju, under two registered sale deeds, dated 29-12-1971, admeasuring Ac.19.50 cents each, aggregating Ac.40-00 cents, 3) Mutyala Veerraju, under a registered sale deed, dated 29-12-1971, admeasuring Ac.40-00 cents and 4) Edala Sathiraju, under a sale deed, dated 29-12-1971, admeasuring Ac.40-00 cents. The petitioners 1 to 7 herein have purchased different extents from the aforesaid four individuals under various registered sale deeds of 1987 and 1988 as follows: Petitioner No.1 is a purchaser of Ac.40-00 cents under two registered sale deeds, dated 09-08-1987, from Mummareddi Venkata Raju. Petitioner No.2 is a purchaser of Ac.25.00 cents, under sale deeds, dated 15-07-1987 and 01-12-1987 from Mutyala Veerraju and also purchaser of Ac.10.00 cents, under sale deed, dated 20-11-1987 from Edala Sathiraju,. Petitioner No.3 is a purchaser of Ac.07-00 cents under sale deed, dated 11-12-1987 from Mutyala Veerraju and also purchaser of Ac.10-70 cents under sale deed, dated 16-07-1987 from Edala Sathiraju, Petitioner No.4 is a purchaser of Ac.35.00 cents under two registered sale deeds, dated 07-06-1987 and 29-06-1987 from Merena Veerraju, and Petitioner No.5 is a purchaser of Ac.05-00 cents under sale deed, dated 20-11-1987, from Edala Sathi Raju. Petitioner No.6 is a purchaser of Ac.6-00 cents under sale deed dated 16-07-1988 and petitioner No.7 is a purchaser of Ac.5.00 cents under sale deed dated 20-11-1987, both from Edala Sathiraju. Thus, all the petitioners claim Ac.159-00 cents. purchased by Ram Prasad Rao from Ch. Jagannadha Rao in the year 1966. In the declaration filed by Ram Prasada Rao, under A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 all the four sale deeds were accepted and excluded from his holding. The vendor’s vendor of the petitioners viz., Ch.Jagannatha Rao, with reference to his declaration, was held holding excess land to the extent of Ac.137.38 cents and in surrender proceedings, it appears that his land admeasuring Ac.132.45 cents in Sy. No.75 was taken over as excess and surrendered land. There is some controversy from the records as to whether the said surrender is in accordance with the surrender statement of the declarant or as to whether the Land Reforms Tribunal itself selected the lands to be surrendered. However, for the purpose of the present proceedings, the excess surrendered land of Ac.132.45 cents appears to have been recorded as surrendered land and available with the Government for distribution. Out of the aforesaid extent, in the year 1991, Ac.129.50 cents was assigned by the Government in the Form of D-Form pattas to 85 persons. While issuing the pattas, on ground, however, pattas are allegedly issued from lands which are purchased and held by petitioners, which is clearly without jurisdiction. The learned counsel for the petitioners has demonstrated overlapping of certain survey numbers with respect to land of the petitioners and the said land assigned to individuals. The assignees have been impleaded in the writ petition as respondents 4 to 59 and some of them have filed a counter affidavit through their counsel. It is also evident from the record that the original Sy. No.75 appears to have been bifercated and the lands of the petitioners appear to have been assigned as Sy. No.75/5. The petitioners contend that since part of their land is assigned in favour of the respondents 4 to 59 herein, the said action is completely unauthorized, without jurisdiction inasmuch as the official respondents had no jurisdiction to deal with the land of the petitioners and accordingly, the Mandamus as prayed for is sought. 3. The respondents 1 to 3 filed counter-affidavit giving the history of the title holding of original owner Ch.Jagannadha Rao and the land ceiling declarations and the surrender of the land by him etc. 4. It is accepted in the counter that there was valid alienation of Ac.159.00 cents. in favour of the petitioners’ predecessor and title having been accepted in the resurvey, it appears that this land in Sy.No.75 was bifurcated into declarant’s surrendered land and petitioner’s land. In the supplemental survey, the total extent of land held by the original owner Ch.Jagannadha Rao, is classified as in Sy. No.75/1, which covers the demarcated surplus land taken possession from the original declarant and the land of the petitioners is classified as Sy.No.75/5. The counter-affidavit asserts that the assignment of land is only from Sy. No.75/1 and as such there is no illegality in the action of the respondents 1 to 3. 5. I have heard Sri M.Adinarayana Raju, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for assignment, appearing for the respondents. 6. The primary contention of the petitioners is that their predecessor-in-interest, Ram Prasad Rao, being owner of Ac.159.00 cents, covered under sale deed, dated 30-11-1966, is not controverted. The said land obviously is not subject matter of declaration or the subsequent surrender proceedings of the original owner Ch.Jagannadha Rao, in view of the fact that the said alienation of Ac.159.00 cents. was accepted as genuine, while considering the declaration of Ch.Jagannadha Rao. Thus, the demarcation of the excess land and the surrender proceedings can only be with reference to the balance land of Ch.Jagannadha Rao and can obviously, not cover and include the land of the petitioners. The petitioners further assert that they continue to be in possession of the property and have been issued pattadar pass books, title deeds etc. and the revenue record showing their possession has not been controverted. 7. Out of the impleaded private party respondents 4 to 59, respondents 10 to 20 alone have filed a counter-affidavit and they also admit that they are not put in possession of extent assigned to them. They however claim that under proceedings of 1991, they have been allotted pattas of different small extents of land and claimed that they are in possession of the said land. The record, however, shows that the writ petition was admitted on 05-05-1998 and interim stay of dispossession was granted. Later, the respondents 10 to 20 filed vacate petition in W.P.M.P.No.2603 of 1998 whereupon, by order dated 16-12-1998, the said interim order of stay of dispossession was converted into one of status quo as on the date of order to be continued pending disposal of the writ petition. The said order is in force. It is, however, to be noticed that none of the other private party respondents have approached this Court nor have made any assertion whatsoever. 8. In view of the fact that the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the official respondents, it is clear that the said respondents have power and jurisdiction to deal with the surrendered excess land of Ch.Jagannadha Rao alone and not the land of the petitioners. Since the said counter-affidavit asserts that there was a resurvey and Sy. No.75 has been freshly demarcated into two bits of Sy.No.75/1 and Sy. No.75/5, respectively, for the land surrendered by Ch.Jagannadha Rao and the land hold by the petitioners, it is necessary to verify survey and demarcate on ground the aforesaid two parts of Sy. No.75. Overlapping, if any, between the land of the petitioners and land assigned by the respondents 1 to 3, is therefore, to be resolved only by appropriate and detailed survey and localization on ground. 9. I, therefore, feel that the aforesaid grievance of the writ petitioners would be effectively met, if respondents 1 to 3 are directed to conduct a detailed and fresh survey after giving notice to all the parties by demarcating Sy. No.75, and by separating the land of the petitioners covered by the registered sale deeds and with reference to link title documents of respective parties. On such demarcation, if the land assigned is found to fall within the land held by the petitioners, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to revise the said assignment by appropriately adjusting and modifying the same from out of the surrendered excess land of the original owner and take further appropriate action accordingly. The respondent No.1 is directed to ensure proper survey and permanent resolution of this controversy and may take appropriate assistance from the Director, Survey Settlements, who may be requested to assign responsible high ranking official. After survey and localization as aforesaid, the respondent No.1 shall afford a hearing to all parties hereto and pass appropriate orders in conformity with the above exercise. Further, in the interest of all parties, the work aforesaid be completed within a period of six months from today. The statusquo as obtaining during pendency of the writ petition will continue till the work envisaged, as above, is completed and final orders are issued by the 1st respondent as directed above. 10. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ________________ 26-11-2008 kvr