IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 4456 of 2004 Between: T. Prasad Rao S/o late T. Appalakonda Agriculturist, R/o Jute Mills Colony, Pattabhipuram Post, Guntur District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Guntur district 2 Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur District 3 Mandal Revenue Officer Phirangipuram, Guntur 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 a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandmaus declaring the action ofthe respondents in not providing alternative land for agricultural purpose to the petitioner in the Revenue Village of Phirangipuram of Guntur District by assigning DKT land in lieu of the which is being resumed by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: Petitioner in substance seeks a direction to the respondents to provide alternative land for agricultural purposes to him in Phirangipuram Village, Guntur District, by way of assignment. Petitioner states that his father T. Appalakonda was a freedom fighter, who was granted temporary assignment in an extent of Ac.5.00 of land in Sy.No.570 of Phirangipuram Village of Sattenapalli Taluq on 6.5.1981. The temporary assignment was in favour of the petitioner’s mother as his father had died by then. Ever since the assignment, the petitioner and his mother were pursuing livelihood by cultivating the land. The petitioner’s mother died on 26.9.1994 and thereafter the petitioner was cultivating the land. The 3rd respondent dispossessed the petitioner on the ground that the assignment was temporary and the land was required for construction of a water tank. In the circumstances, the petitioner applied for a fresh assignment of land and has filed this writ petition for the same relief. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is admitted that the petitioner’s father Appalakonda was a freedom fighter, who died on 15.1.1982. On his death, his widow Smt. T.Durgamma submitted a representation for assignment of Ac.5.00 in Sy.No.570 of Phirangipuram Village, on the ground that her husband was a freedom fighter. On this representation, in a Government Memo dated 31.3.1983, the petitioner’s mother Smt. T. Durgamma was requested to approach the District Collector, Guntur, for orders. The District Collector by an endorsement dated 22.4.1983 forwarded Durgamma’s representation to the Tahsildar, Sattenapalli, for enquiry and report. It would appear that much earlier, the Tahsildar, Sattenapalli on 6.5.1981 had issued temporary permission to Durgamma to cultivate an extent of Ac.5.00 in Sy.No.570 of Phirangipuram Village. The petitioner’s mother Durgamma died in 1994. According to the 3rd respondent, the petitioner is not cultivating the land and the land is also classified as Tank Poramboke in revenue records; the area is now proposed for development and conversion as drinking water tank for the village. As it is a Tank Poramboke land, no assignment of such a land is permissible and that is the reason no assignment was made in favour of the petitioner’s parents either, though the petitioner’s father was a freedom fighter. In para (4) of the counter, the 3rd respondent admits that some villagers of Repudi and Phirangipuram Villages had occupied the land and had raised cotton crop. In Para (5), the 3rd respondent states that it is not possible to assign alternative land to the petitioner since no land is available for assignment at Phirangipuram and the petitioner is also not eligible for assignment as he does not reside in Phirangipuram. In the facts and circumstances of this case and in the light of the averments in the counter affidavit, the petitioner is not entitled to grant of the relief in specie as prayed for, since the land in Sy.No.570 of Phirangipuram Village, Sattenapalli Taluq is stated to be a Tank Poramboke intended for conversion into a tank, meant for providing drinking water to the villagers. The 3rd respondent has also taken a clear stand that there is no other alternative land available in the village for assignment to the petitioner and that the petitioner may also not be eligible in view of his not being a resident of Phirangipuram Village. What is however disturbing is the admission of the 3rd respondent in Para (4) of the counter that certain residents of Phirangipuram and Repudi villages had occupied the land (in Sy.No.570 which is a Tank Poramboke) and have raised cotton crop. The counter does not state that any proceedings had been initiated to evict the encroachers of the Tank Poramboke/Government property. In the state of pleadings in the 3rd respondent’s counter, the 3rd respondent conveys the message that a citizen may unlawfully occupy Government property and retain it without hindrance but may not seek assignment. This is an evil moral instruction to citizens and subverts Constitutional governance. It is unfortunate that the 3rd respondent has chosen to file such a casual and negligent counter and neither the Revenue Divisional Officer nor the District Collector, who are Respondents 2 and 1 to the Writ Petition respectively, have chosen to respond. In all the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner is seen to have a grievance. The grievance of non-assignment of land cannot be assuaged in view of the circumstances pointed out above. However, the substantive grievance of the petitioner, as a consequence of the 3rd respondent’s averments that illegal encroachment is a preferred way of acquiring Government property, remains. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with costs of Rs.2,500/- (rupees two thousand five hundred only) payable by respondents to the petitioner, within a period of two months from today. GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 21.4.2008 cvm