*THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR + W.A.No.833 of 2006 % 17—06—2011 # Smt. Rani Sundarammani …Appellant vs. $ 1.The Govt. ofA.P., rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and ohters. … Respondents ! Counsel for the Appellant : Sri Challa Sitaramaiah Sr.Counsel for M.Adinarayana Raju ^Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3 : Govt. Pleader for Revenue Counsel for respondent No.4 : Advocate General <Gist : >Head Note : ? Cases referred [1] AIR 1952 MADRAS 323 (FB) 2 AIR 1968 SC 1005 3 AIR 1918 PC 182 4 (1997) 2 SCC 267 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR W.A.No.833 of 2006 Date of Judgment: 17-06-2011 Between: Smt. Rani Sundarammani w/o late Sri Raja Veera Basara Chikkaryala Yeshovantha Bahadur (Ex.Zamindar) ..Appellant and 1.The Govt. ofA.P., rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and ohters. ..Respondents The Court made the following Judgment: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR W.A.No.833 of 2006 Oral Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) 1. This appeal by the writ petitioner is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 07-06- 2006 dismissing W.P.No.25265 of 2000 filed questioning the action of the respondents in placing the forest areas covered by Yerrangavaripalle village and the lands in Paimash No.120 to 139 of Penubalakala village of Chittoor District in Prohibitory Order Book register dated 03-06-1999 and 17-05-2000 as illegal and for a consequential direction to the respondents to implement G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957 by incorporating the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. 2. The facts have been extensively dealt with by the learned single Judge in the impugned order. Therefore, it is unnecessary to reproduce the same except those which are relevant and they may, briefly, be stated as under. 3. Punganoor Zamin Estate was notified on 07-09-1950 and taken over by the Government on 22-07-1952 under the provisions of A.P. Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (for brevity ‘the Act 26/1948’). On notifying and taking over of Zamin, a representation was made to the Government by the Zamindar stating that certain lands do not belong to Estate and are personal properties of Zamindar as the said lands are purchased by his ancestors more than 80 years before the date of abolition of the Estate. The Government accepted the claim of the Zamindar to the extent of forest areas of Yerranagavaripalle and the areas covered by Paimash No.120 to 139 of Penubalakala hamlet of Peddakapalli. The Government after consultation with the Board of Revenue and with its concurrence issued G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957 wherein it was noted that from out of the villages mentioned in the schedule to the petition of the Zamindar of Punganoor, three villages i.e. Annagaripalle, Bonthavaripalle and Bharanipalle had been taken over by the Government under the Act 26/1948 and the forests therein vested in the Government. With regard to the remaining 32 villages, the Government agreed with the views of the Board of Revenue and considered that the claim of the landholder was untenable in all cases except in respect of the forest areas of Yerranagavaripalle village those covered by Paimash Nos.120 to 139 of Penubalakala. The Government directed that all the forest areas situated in or near the 32 specified villages except the forests of Yerranagavaripalle and those covered by Paimash Nos.120 to 139 of Penubalakala will deemed to have been vested with the Government along with main Punganoor Zamindari with effect from 22-07-1952 (on which date the said Zamindari was taken over by the Government). The Director of Settlement was requested to include the forest revenue derived from all the forest areas referred to in the G.O. except the forests of Yerranagavaripalle village and Paimash Nos.120 to 139 of Penubalakala hamlet in the computation of the basic annual sum relating to Punganoor Zamin, if he had not already included it and to revise the advance compensation, if necessary. The Government also approved the proposal of the Board of Revenue regarding declaration of the forests and directed the officials to get the boundaries of the forests in all 32 villages aforesaid demarcated with the chains so that the survey staff can take up the survey of the areas with the least possible delay and complete it expeditiously and at the minimum cost. 4. At that stage Zamindar filed W.P.No.320 of 1957 to quash G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957. The Government filed a detailed counter in the said writ petition inter alia contending that the Settlement Officer, Chittoor conducted suo motu enquiry under Section 9 of Act 26/1948. It stated that in respect of all the 32 villages he held while the villages were estates within the meaning of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates Land Act, 1908 (for short “Estate Land Act”), they were not Inam estates within the meaning of Section 2(7) of the Act 26/1948, as they became estates by reason of the amending Act of 1936. Therefore, the villages though not inam estates are estates within the meaning of the Estate Land Act. Further, it is stated the suggestion that these villages were included in the list of the villages not taken over under the Act 26/1948 cannot militate against the fact that these village constitute estates within the meaning of Estate Land Act and have been expressly held so by the Settlement Officer. It is not correct to state that these villages were not treated as estates for purposes of Act 30/1947. In fact, notifications under Section 3(2) of the said Act (30/1947) were issued in respect of 23 villages out of 32 villages mentioned in the G.O. and for the balance no notification was issued, as there were not ryoti lands. In para-6 of the counter it was specifically pleaded that the forests being outside the limits of the Inam villages as confirmed by the Inam Commissioner do form part of the Zamindari of Punganur, which was notified under Section 1(4) of the Act 26/1948 and taken over with effect from 22-07-1952. By reason of Section 3(b) of the Act 26/1948 the forest which form part of the impartible Zamindari of Punganur stand transferred to and vest in the Government. In para-8 of the counter it was stated that the petitioner filed a petition before the Collector of Chittoor on 20-08- 1952 stating that his predecessors-in-title purchased a number of whole inam villages situated within the ambit of the Zamindari of Punganur, that they had been declared not to be inam estates, that there are large tracts of trees of spontaneous growth in area appertaining to the said village, that he is entitled to such forest areas as successor- in-interests of his predecessors and requesting that suitable direction may be issued to the Estate officials and to the District Forest Officer not to interfere with his rights in the forests aforementioned. To the said petition schedule has been appended wherein the villages in question have been referred to. There are 12 villages in Avulapalli group and 5 villages in Suddaguntalapalli group and 6 villages in Gumkonda group. The other batch of 9 independent villages have also been included in the said schedule. Further, the villages of Annammagaripalli, Bontavaripalli and Beripalli were also included in that schedule. It was submitted that insofar as the last three villages were concerned, there has been a notification under the provisions of the Act 26/1948 and the said three villages were taken over. Therefore, the question of right to the forest lands in the said three villages is not open to challenge. As regards the other 32 villages, it was submitted that the village of Yerranagavaripalle and certain Paimash numbers in Penubalakala were excluded from G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957. As regards the other villages, it is stated that the matter was fully considered with reference to the available material including the relevant IFR extracts. It is stated that on a fair interpretation of the relevant extracts of the IFR relating to these villages, it will be found that the Zamindar claimed the forest lands exclusively and they were therefore, excluded from the area of the inam villages which were confirmed, and on the strength of which title deeds were duly given. It is the case of the Zamindar that the forests are independent of the inam villages and that he is the exclusive owner thereof. The matter was carefully examined by the Collector and Board of Revenue on the material available and after due consideration the Government passed G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957, the objections contained in clauses (a) to (h) of para-6 are untenables. The said writ petition was dismissed holding that the question as to whether the land forms part of Estate must be decided on consideration of several documents and the same cannot be done within the limited scope of writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and therefore it is just and equitable course from the point of view of all parties concerned would be to refer the aggrieved party to a suit wherein he could adduce all available evidence and there would be a judicial consideration of all evidence adduced and findings would be arrived at which in their turn could be canvassed, if necessary, in a court of appeal, if not in more than one court. Having regard to the fact that the said question cannot be satisfactorily disposed of in a writ petition, this court directed that the petitioner to see remedies, if any, in a properly constituted suit. Holding so this Court dismissed the writ petition on 12-02-1958. 5. On issuing declaration proposing to constitute the land with the boundaries specified in the schedule to the G.O. reserve forest under the A.P. Forest Act, 1967 (for short “the Act 1/1967”), one Sri A.Raja Reddy and 13 others requested the Settlement Officer to grant Ryotwari patta in their favour in an extent of Ac.27.55 cts. in Sy.No.210 and Ac.1605.70 cts. in Sy.No.211 of Peddakapalli village. The Settlement Officer, Nellore conducted an enquiry under Section 11(a) of the Act 26/1948 and granted Ryotwari patta in favour of A.Raja Reddy and 13 others for an extent Ac.381.00 out of Ac.1605.70 cts. in Sy.No.211. He further held that the rest of the land be notified as “assessed waste” according to the existing classification in the village accounts. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Settlement Officer, Nellore, the respondent, Seshadri Naidu and others preferred R.P.No.94 of 1970 before the Director of Settlements, Hyderabad; whereas Sri A.Raja Reddy preferred R.P.No.42 of 1971. Aggrieved by the grant of patta in favour of A.Raja Reddy in respect of 381 acres the Collector preferred R.P.No.41 of 1972. While these revisions are pending adjudication, the Government in exercise of its powers under Section 4 of the Act 1/1967 issued G.O.Ms.No.1427, dated 29-03-1972 proposing to constitute the land within the boundaries specified in the schedule to the notification as a reserve forest and to appoint a Forest Settlement Officer to consider objections, if any, and determine the existence, nature and extent of any rights, claimed by or alleged to exist in any of the persons in, or over, any land comprised within such limits or to any forests in such land and to deal with the same. 7. The petitioner and her sons themselves impleaded in R.P.No.94 of 1970 and batch stating that she and her sons were interested and that the matter had been proceeded without impleading them as parties, without notice to them and without their knowledge; therefore, she and others i.e. sons and daughters of Ex.-Zamindar have to be impleaded as parties. The Director of Settlement clubbed all the above revision petitions and by a common order dated 08-04-1976 cancelled the patta granted by the Settlement Officer in respect of 381 acres in Sy.No.211 and directed to place them at the disposal of the Government. So far as the remaining land i.e. second set of lands he upheld the order of the Settlement Officer classifying them as ‘waste’. Meanwhile, the petitioner herein as an individual filed declaration under Section 8(1) A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short “Land Reforms Act”) on 11-04-1975 excluding the lands in Yerranagavaripalle village and the land in Paimash Nos.120 to 139 of Penubalakala hamlet. The Land Reforms Tribunal, Madanapalle in C.C.No.883/PGN/75, dated 10-05- 1976 held that since the declarant was an individual, she was entitled to hold one standard holding and since the total standard holding held by her was more than the ceiling area under Section 4(1) of the Land Reforms Act, it was determined under Section 9 of the Land Reforms Act that the declarant held 0.0534 standard holding of land in excess of the ceiling area on the notified date i.e. 01-01-1975. 8. Aggrieved by the order of the Director of Settlements canceling the patta granted in favour of A.Raja Reddy holding that grant of patta by the Settlement Officer was based upon documents which were patently bogus and that the entire case bristled with shady deals and fabrications aimed at swallowing huge extents of Government land he (Raja Reddy) filed a revision petition before the Board of Revenue for stay of order of Director of Settlement. The Board by its order dated 24-05-1976 declined to grant stay. Against which Raja Reddy filed W.P.No.2075 of 1976. This Court by order dated 06-10-1976 dismissed the writ petition directing the Board of Revenue to dispose of the revision as expeditiously as possible. 9. The Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad heard the revisions filed by Raja Reddy and others under Section 7(d) of the Act 26/1948 against the common order of the Director of Settlement, Hyderabad in R.P.No.94 of 1970 and batch dated 08-04-1976 confirming the order of the Director of Settlement. 10. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner and her sons got themselves impleaded in R.P.No.94 of 1970 have not filed any further revision, but submitted a representation to the Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh. On receipt of said representation, the same was forwarded to Chief Conservator of Forests, who by letter dated 03-11-1982 informed the petitioner that the areas of Yerranagavaripalle village were not covered by reserve forest. 11. On dismissal of revision by the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Raja Reddy filed W.P.No.8368 of 1982 which was allowed by this Court by order dated 28-12-1987 setting aside the order of the Commissioner passed in revision on 23-09-1982 and remanded the matter for consideration afresh. 12. During the pendency of the revision petition before the Commissioner, the Divisional Forest Officer by letter dated 15-07-1997 informed the Mandal Revenue Officer that as per the instructions of the Government in Memo dated 31-03-1997 and as instructed by the Government on 17-06-1997 the forest block of Avulapalle was notified under Section 4 of the Act 1/1967 vide G.O.Ms.No.1427 dated 29-03-1972 and the land in Avulapalle forest block included the land in Sy.No.211 of Peddakapalli village. The M.R.O. was requested to enter the particulars in the Prohibitory Order Book. The District Collector vide proceedings dated 31-07-1997 requested the M.R.O. to enter the said lands in the Prohibitory Order Book of his Mandal and to intimate this fact directly to the Divisional Forest Officer (West) Chittoor under intimation to the Collector. Pursuant to remand, the Commissioner by order dated 22-06-1998 dismissed the revision petition filed by Raja Reddy and the same was communicated by proceedings dated 02-07-1998. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 14-09-1998 to the Collector bringing to his notice that her right to forest areas must be deemed to have been recognized under Section 20(1) r/w Section 68 of the Act 26/1948 in G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957 and as such the area has to be demarcated and the petitioner’s name to be included as its owner in the revenue records of the area. The petitioner requested that various areas in Yerranagavaripalle village though covered by Paimash Nos.120 to 139 lying in Pedda Panjani Revenue Mandal be demarcated and included in the revenue records of the respective villages as patta lands in the name of the petitioner, the legal heir of the Zamindar. 13. On receipt of endorsement dated 03-06-1999 from the Collector’s office notifying that the lands measuring an extent of 1274.70 cts. under survey number 211 cannot be mutated in favour of the petitioner in the revenue records as the land was in possession of the Forest Department and the same was recorded in Prohibitory Order Book, the petitioner filed the present writ petition for issuing a Mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents in placing the forest area covered by Yerranagavaripalle village and the lands in Paimash Nos.120 to 139 of Penubalakala village of Chittoor District in Prohibitory Order Book register dated 03-06-1999 and 17-05-2000 as illegal, ultravires opposed to the provisions of Act 26/1948 and violative of principles of natural justice and to direct the respondents to implement G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957 by incorporating the name of the petitioner in the revenue records of lands covered by Yerranagavaripalle village and the lands covered by Paimash Nos.120 to 139 of Penubalakala village of Chittoor District. 14. The 2nd respondent—District Collector filed a counter on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 stating that an extent of Ac.1605.07 cts. in Paimash Nos.120 to 139 co-related Sy.Nos.211 of Penubalakala village is covered by forest and the Government is in possession all these lands and the lands have been shown as ‘waste’ in revenue records. By virtue of Section 3 (b) of the Act 26/1948 the entire estate including minor inams post settlement or pre-settlement included in the assets of the Zamindari Estate at the permanent settlement of the Estate, all communal lands and porambokes other non-ryoti lands, waste lands, pasture lands, lanka lands, forests, mines and minerals, quarries, rivers and streams, tanks and irrigation works, fisheries and ferries shall stand transferred to the Government and vest in them, free of all encumbrances. On the representation made by the erstwhile Zamindar to the Government on 20- 08-1956 to recognize him as the owner of the forest areas situated in 35 villages on the ground that the said lands had been purchased by predecessors-in-title about 80 years ago, the Government on consideration of the said representation issued G.O.Ms.No.439, dated 13-03-1957 declaring that the forest areas situated in or near 32 villages specified in the said G.O. have been vested in the Government except the forests of Yerranagavaripalle and those covered by Paimash Nos.120 to139 of Penubalakala with a direction to the Director of Settlements, Andhra Pradesh to include the forest revenue derived from all the forests areas referred to above except the forests of Yerranagavaripalle and the Paimash Nos.120 to 139 of Penubalakala in the computation of the basic annual sum relating to Punganoor Zamine estate if he has not already included it and to revise the advance compensation if necessary. Questioning the same the Ex-Zamindar filed W.P.No.320 of 1957 in which the Government filed a detailed counter. The said writ petition was disposed of directing the Ex-Zamindar to seek his remedies in a properly constituted suit. The said judgment has become final. On failure to file a suit as directed in the writ petition, the petitioner’s rights, if any, are perished by Section 27 of Limitation Act, as the suit schedule lands, admittedly, are forest land full of shrub growth and trees and the remaining land throughout as non-ryoti. The huge extent of forest land was never in cultivation either in pre-abolition or post-abolition period. The petitioner having admitted that it is a forest land cannot claim patta for the same. The land stands transferred and vested in the name of Government free from all encumbrances. The rights of the petitioner, if any, extinguished by virtue of Section 3(b) of the Act 26/1948. As the suit land is forest land and not cultivated by anybody, the District Forest Officer (West) submitted a report to the Collector, Chittoor vide reference DM3631/95, dated 15-07-1997 requesting the latter to enter the said Sy.No.211 in Prohibitory Order Book Register. Accordingly, the Collector issued instructions to the Mandal Revenue Officer, Peddapanjani to enter the suit lands in Prohibitory Order Book Register vide reference No.B9/1791/97, dated 31-07-1997 and also reply to the averments made in the writ petition in detail which are not relevant. 15. The 4th respondent filed a separate counter stating that joint inspection has been undertaken by a team consisting of Forest officials and Revenue officials in respect of the area covered under Sy.No.211 of Peddakapalli which are claimed to be the personal property of the writ petitioner. On the basis of joint inspection the boundaries of the reserve forest area have been fixed from survey station Nos.143 to 114 and the said survey revealed that the lands claimed by the writ petition are falling mostly inside reserve forest to the extent of 1175 acres except for a small extent 100 acres falling outside reserve forest and the map is enclosed to the counter. 16. A reply has been filed by the writ petitioner reiterating the stand taken in the writ petition. 17. Sri Challa Sitaramaiah, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, submitted written submissions. In the written submissions he gave a brief introduction of Zamindari system as under: “Zamindar literally means land holder. The system of Zamindari was brought about by the Mohammadan rulers. In the eyes of ruler he as no more than a Collector of Revenue. The area was fixed, the demand for the revenue depended on the necessity of the government. To avoid this it was suggested that there should be a permanent settlement with the Zamindar. Hence in 1802 the permanent settlement regulation was passed. The effect of the regulation was to convert the precarious tenure of the Zamindaris into a permanent one. It gave the Zamindaris a right to hold their estates on a fixed peshkush with heritability. Peshkush means a fixed assessment of revenue payable by the Zamindar to the Government to all the lands granted under the Sanad. Under clause 2 of the Regulation 1802 the proprietary right of the soil became vested in the Zamindar. Under clause 3 of the regulation a deed of permanent proprietary right was granted to the Zamindar and a permanent assessment of revenue was fixed. Zamindar could also own lands, not falling within the grant of the permanent settlement regulation 1802, lands not granted by the government. It was on the strength of the sovereign power the grant was made, the same sovereign power can take over or cancel the grant. When it was cancelled that which was ranted by the government would revert to the government. It was on the strength of the sovereign power the grants were revoked by Act 26/1948. The Andhra Pradesh Estate (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act). Whatever was granted under the sanad reverted to the Government. The lands owned by the Zamindar outside the grant will continue to be the Zamindar’s personal property. Consequences of notification: The first aspect:- On the notification by the government under Act 26/1948 all the assets, all the lands granted under the sanad including the communal lands, Porambokes and non Ryoti Lands Mines, Forests vest in the Government. All enactments applicable to the ryotwari settlement apply to the estate, because the Zamindari is converted to Ryotwari settlement. As the Ryotwari settlement was introduced by Act 26/1948 in occupation of ryoti land as defined in section 3(16) of the Estates Land Act and the land holder in occupation of private land as defined in Section 3(10) of the Estates Land Act would not be disturbed until the claim is determined by the prescribed authority under the Act 26/1948. The claim by the land holder, Zamindar or the ryot is only in respect of the lands granted under the sanad. Section 11 of the Act 26/1948 deals with ryot, sections 12, 13, 14 deal with the Land holder of different types of Estates Zamindari, Inam Estate, under tenure.