THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3678 and 3692 of 2007 COMMON ORDER: Heard both sides. Since these two Revisions arise out of the common proceedings and almost between the same parties, they are taken up together for disposal. In these two Civil Revision Petition Nos.3678 and 3692 of 2007, the petitioners, claiming to be the occupants and as such, entitled for grant of ryotwari pattas in respect of the subject matter of the land, seeks to question the common order, dated 04.06.2007, passed by the District Judge, Nellore, in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.3 and 4 of 2005, respectively, wherein and whereby the order, dated 22.11.2004, passed by the Joint Collector-cum-Settlement Officer, Nellore, in S.R.Nos.1 and 2/15(1)/1969, holding that the petitioners are not entitled for grant of pattas in respect of the subject matter of the land, was upheld. The main submission made on behalf of the petitioners is that in earlier round of proceedings the matter was remanded by the Estate Abolition Tribunal, Chittoor, to the Primary authority with certain observations, which are as under: - (1) In the claim petition each party claimed Acs.40.00 cents but Settlement Officer granted patta for Acs.100.00 cents (Acs.60.00 and Acs.40.00) based on the vague oral evidence. (2) The cultivation in Acs.10.00 and Acs.15.00 was not during the relevant period but it relates to Fasli 1375 & 1376. (3) It has to be probed whether the cultivation by the claimants is in respect of the same land or for the different portions of land in this Survey Number. (4) The Settlement Order does not reveal under what provision of E.A. Act, the patta was granted. (5) According to the counter of the Tahsildar, the land is a river poramboke but encroached by several persons unauthorisedly. (6) If it is a private land, the landholder might not have permitted such cultivation.” However, in spite of the fact that several documents were filed by the petitioners to support their possession on the subject matter of the land at the relevant point of time, the same were totally invalidated and ultimately, their claim was rejected only on the ground that those lands are registered as Suvarnamukhi river, which is a natural course, passing through Chittoor and Nellore Districts. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the objection that the lands are registered as Suvarnamukhi river is being put against the petitioners for the first time and that without providing any opportunity to the petitioners and also without any material in support of such plea, both the Primary and Appellate authorities negatived the claim of the petitioners. In spite of the material filed to support the petitioners’ case and especially in the absence of any material to support the claim of the respondents that the lands are registered as Suvarnamukhi river, the petitioners are totally deprived of the opportunity to contest the cases. Hence, he submitted that there is no justification to reject the claim of the petitioners. Having heard learned counsel on either side and on a perusal of the material on record, it is quite apparent that earlier, in spite of the remand of the matter by the Tribunal, as mentioned above, and further, the documentary evidence also being available on record for the corresponding period, there is no categorical finding on the same by the Primary authority. However, for the first time the plea that the lands are registered as Suvarnamukhi river is put against the petitioners without giving them any opportunity to contest or rebut the same. The Appellate authority without going into the merits, and without considering the merits on either side, upheld the order of the Primary authority, holing that the petitioners are not entitled to grant of ryotwari pattas in respect of the subject matter of the land. Hence, it is quite desirable that appropriate opportunity be given to both the parties to have a say on all the aspects including on the aspect as to whether the lands are registered as Suvarnamukhi river or not and whether the petitioners are entitled to the relief as sought for. For the foregoing, both the Civil Revision Petitions are, accordingly, allowed and the matter is remanded to the Primary Authority namely The Joint Collector-cum- Settlement Officer, Nellore, for conducting a fresh enquiry and to dispose of the matter afresh, on merits. Further, in view of the fact that a new plea i.e., the subject matter of the lands are registered as Suvarnamukhi river, had been put forth, both the parties are at liberty to lead in evidence, if they choose so, afresh. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO 1st July 2010 dr