IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23833 of 2001 Between: Linga Vijaya Kumar … Petitioner AND The Collector and District Magistrate, Khammam District, Khammam, A.P., and others. … Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri I. Mallikarjuna Sharma Counsel for respondents 1&2: AGP for Revenue This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23833 of 2001 ORDER:- This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus to direct respondent No.1 to hold meeting of the District Land Assignment Committee (for short, ‘the Committee’) forthwith to discuss about the proposal placed before it for assignment of the Matruka lands adjoining the petitioner’s lands in Sy.Nos.88 and 89 of Pallegudem Revenue Village to the petitioner and his brother Linga Nageshwar Rao having due regard to their longstanding occupation and possession of the lands. Heard Sri I. Mallikarjuna Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and perused the record. The case of the petitioner is that during the past 100 to 150 years his family had been in possession of the Martuka lands forming border region of his village with Muthukunta and Yedulapuram Villages adjoining their kud-kasht patta lands to the extent of about Ac.0.40 guntas (Ac.1.00), that the said lands are known in the village as ‘Venkaiah Gari Boadu’, that their family was traditionally using a part of the said land for grazing purposes and another part for cultivation and that his father and later he and his younger brother invested considerable amounts to transform a part of the said land to be ﬁt for cultivation. It is his further case that in about Ac.0.10 guntas of the said land he and his brother are carrying on wet (paddy) cultivation for the last 10 years or so and that prior to that the said land was used for dry cultivation and grazing purposes. The petitioner further averred that about 20 years ago his father gave away a small part of the said land to the village for common purpose of erecting a small temple for village Goddess known as “Maremma Gudi”. As the temple was slowly developed into a holly premises, his father gave away 5 – 7 guntas for the temple purposes. The possession of the said land by the petitioner was duly recorded in ‘B’ Memo and ‘4-C’ register in the Mandal Revenue Oﬃce and the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer also recommended grant of the said land to them in the year 1998 by sending a proposal to the Committee. He further averred that the date for the meeting of the said Committee was also ﬁxed, but in the last minute it was postponed. The petitioner further stated that at the instance of the commercial vested interests belonging to Reddypalle, a hamlet of the petitioner’s village and other land sharks, a proposal was put up to enlarge the premises of Maremma Gudi and hand over the entire Matruka lands of about Ac.0.30 guntas adjoining the petitioner’s patta lands to the Endowment Department and the District Collector started taking undue interest in completing the said transaction and that an extent of Ac.0.10 guntas was leveled by a poclain without notice to the petitioner and his brother. The petitioner therefore ﬁled the present writ petition for the relief as referred to above. In the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled by the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Khammam Rural Mandal, Khammam District, it is inter alia stated that as per the village map and records, an extent of Ac.1.00 of land comprised in Sy.Nos.87, 88 and 89 was not assigned any survey number and it was called as ‘Bila Dhakala’ number or ‘Matruka’ land, that it pertains to the Government and none of the ryots have any right over the said land and that the petitioner and his brother encroached Ac.0.20 guntas of cultivable land leaving the balance Ac.0.20 guntas of rocky and hillock area, wherein Goddess Maremma temple is situate. It is further averred that the petitioner and his brother are no way concerned with the Government land, that as Maremma temple is being developed by the Endowment Department, an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas is proposed to be utilized for that purpose and that the Endowment Department leveled the land on Ac.0.20 guntas covered by boulders, which is unﬁt for cultivation. He further stated that the remaining area of Ac.0.20 guntas, which is the wet land is in possession of the petitioner as per 4-C register. He further stated that during the year 1998, the name of Smt. Linga Susheela, wife of Nageswara Rao was proposed for assignment for Ac.0.20 guntas as the same was in their occupation and the Committee has not met on the day on which the meeting was scheduled. As the petitioner and his brother own lands to the extent of Ac.3.17 guntas and Ac.3.21 ½ guntas respectively, the proposals were not processed further for being considered by the Committee at a later stage. Respondent No.1 asserted that the Government has every right to use the land for public purpose and the petitioner trespassed into Ac.0.20 guntas of the Government land over which he cannot claim any right. From the respective pleadings of the parties, it could be seen that out of Ac.1.00 of the Government land, the petitioner has been cultivating Ac.0.20 guntas and the balance Ac.0.20 guntas are proposed to be given for development of Maremma temple, undoubtedly a public purpose. The only basis on which the petitioner asserts his claim for grant of the land in occupation of his family members is the longstanding possession. Mere possession, howsoever long it may be, does not cloth a person, who otherwise has no right over such land, to claim the same as of right, more so, when such land is admittedly a Government land, which can be put to use for public purposes. Unless the Government on its own thinks appropriate to assign the lands to the eligible and needy persons, the Court cannot compel the Government to part its land in favour of the persons, who already own some lands. If the petitioner and his brother feel that they are eligible for assignment in terms of the Government policy, they can always make applications and if the respondents do not consider their applications in accordance with law that gives rise to a cause of action. In this case, though the petitioner claimed that he is a landless poor person, on his own showing, the Government land over which he is making a claim is situated adjoining his kud-kasht patta lands. This necessarily means that the petitioner and his family members own their own patta lands. It is for them to establish that they are landless poor persons. In this view of the matter, I do not ﬁnd any reason to interfere with the proposed allotment of Ac.0.20 guntas of land, which was occupied by boulders and found to be unﬁt for carrying on agriculture, in favour of the Endowment Department for development of a temple. As far as the balance extent of Ac.0.20 guntas, which appears to be wet land and in occupation of the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to make an appropriate application for assignment and if the respondents ﬁnd that he or any of his family members are eligible for such assignment, they shall consider their case in terms of the policy of the Government. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.30095 of 2001 and WVMP.No.795 of 2002 are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 22.09.2008 ES