HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMA MOHANA RAO Writ Petition No.5387 of 2009 ORDER (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition has been instituted, in public interest by a practicing Advocate, seeking a writ of mandamus for declaring the orders passed by the first respondent-State Government in their G.O.Ms.No.286, Revenue (Assignment.IV) Department dated 26.02.2009 alienating certain parcels of land totaling to an extent of Ac.30.00 acres in Sy.Nos.34, 36 etc., of Khajapur Village, Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District in favour of the 4th respondent on a nominal value of Rs.1,60,000/- per acre, as unjust, capricious and in violation of Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Alienation of State Land Revenue Rules, 1975, referred to as ‘Rules’ in short. 2. The writ petitioner submits that valuable land situated in Khajapur Village of Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District, has been unjustly alienated in favour of the 4th respondent without adopting the method of public auction and it is contrary to Rule 6 of the Rules. He submits that the 4th respondent is a private company and the alienation of land does not sub-serve any public purpose and that the market value of the land is more than Rs.10 lakhs per acre and the alienation has been made only with a view to favour the 4th respondent. 3. On behalf of the first respondent-State Government, a detailed counter affidavit has been filed. It is stated therein that the 4th respondent has solicited for allotment of certain extents of land for enabling him to carry on industrial activity and that the District Collector, Medak, has carefully studied the proposal before the same is also studied by the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration as well as the Empowered Committee and the proposal was considered carefully at the Government level in various departments such as Revenue, Finance and Industry and that the matter has also been considered by the Cabinet of the State and permission has been accorded for alienating the land in favour of the 4th respondent only after fixing the appropriate market value. 4. The 4th respondent has also filed a detailed counter affidavit in the matter. It is asserted therein that the 4th respondent has intended to establish an integrated steel plant and also a 15 Megawatts Captive Power Plant at a total investment of approximately Rs.300 crores. It is stated that the 4th respondent has purchased, by private negotiations, land of an extent of Ac.100.00 in Khajapur Village, which is a remote and backward Village in Medak District. While the 4th respondent has set apart Ac.60.00 for plant area leaving the rest of Ac.40.00 of land for the purpose of green belt and truck parking area. The land belonging to the Government in small bits and pieces is available here and there, around which the 4th respondent has already purchased various extents of land. The land belonging to the Government is mostly rocky soil and is not useful for cultivation because of the presence of boulders and rocks. If this Government land is acquired, it will only help the 4th respondent for formation of contiguous alignment with the rest of the land purchased by him and therefore, he applied for alienation of these scattered bits of land which are otherwise not fit for cultivation to be utilised for his industrial purpose. It is stated that this application of the 4th respondent has been favourably considered inasmuch as by then the 4th respondent was seriously pursuing with various licensing authorities for establishing a sponge iron plant with a capacity of 22,500 metric tones and a captive power plant. It is pointed out by the 4th respondent that establishing an industry in the form of a sponge iron plant in such a remote and backward locality of Medak District would go a long way in not only providing employment to several thousands of people, but it would also help small scale and other ancillary industries to spring up in the vicinity and would also help in generating lot of revenue to the State otherwise also. 5. It is specifically asserted by the 4th respondent that the land value in the vicinity of the lands of the Government is in the range of Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/-per acre and it is highly exaggerated by the writ petitioner when he claimed that the land value is approximately Rs.10 lakhs per acre. 6. Heard Sri Kanakamedala Ravindra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Ch. Dhanamjaya, learned counsel for the 4th respondent. 7. From the definition of the expression ‘public purpose’, as defined in Rule 2(j) of the Rules, which are framed in terms of Section 25 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli, it becomes crystal clear that a purpose which is conducive for the good of considerable section of the community at large or of the locality or of the region, alienation of government land becomes permissible. It is no doubt true that the definition tried to clarify the larger community interests by indicating like the construction of schools, temples, churches, mosques, choultries, roads, hospitals etc. The rule making authority has not chosen to restrict the community purposes to the aforementioned few limitations only, when he consciously used the expression ‘like’ there. Therefore, the purpose for which the land is sought to be alienated has got to be independently examined as to whether it would sub-serve the interest of a larger community of a considerable section in the locality or region or not. It is hardly in doubt that establishing a sponge iron company, would provide for considerable employment opportunities, both direct and indirect. Therefore, the alienation of land made by the first respondent- State Government in favour of the 4th respondent can be construed, safely, as for a public purpose only. Rule 3(b) of the Rules enables applications to be made seeking for alienation of land by companies or associations or societies or institutions. Hence no exception need be taken to the conduct of the 4th respondent in applying for alienation. Rule 4 of the Rules provided for a detailed procedure to be followed in the matter of consideration of applications for alienation of land. All that Rule 4(c) of the Rules would require is, every case of alienation of land, in favour of companies or private associations or local bodies or local authorities or private individuals, shall require the sanction of the State Government for which purpose an application should be made in terms of Appendix-I of the Rules. Rule 4(f) suggests that every such application, for the purpose of ascertaining the land value in the vicinity, should be processed through the District Collector concerned. Rule 6 dealt with the conditions subject to which the grant can be made by the State Government. Importantly, the power to resume the possession of the land so alienated by the Government, has been retained, obviously to use such a power, if it is noticed by the Government at any time later on, that the land is not put to use set out in the application. 8. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue has produced the entire file leading up to the decision resulting in the impugned order for our perusal. 9. The District Collector, upon receipt of the application from R.4, has called for a factual report from the local Tahsildar as to whether the lands in question are the scattered ones or not and he also called for a market value report of these lands. The Tahsildar, apart from physical inspection of the lands, has collected the sales statistics of lands in the vicinity in the past three years from the Sub-Registrar’s Office at Ramayampet, Medak District. The inspection carried out by the Tahsildar confirmed the fact that these lands sought to be alienated in favour of 4th respondent are scattered in various Survey Numbers and they are small extents of land in the form of bits and pieces. The Tahsildar has also analyzed the sales statistics of lands in the vicinity in the past three years and has pointed out that the lands have been sold for values ranging from Rs.14,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per acre and that the 4th respondent has purchased the land in the vicinity from a private pattedar @ Rs.80,000/-per acre by way of registered sale deed on 05.01.2008 and hence, the local people in the Khajapur Village have stated at the time of his inspection that the land value in the village has now gone up to Rs.80,000/-per acre. The Tahsildar has interacted with several persons in the Village. The Tahsildar has therefore suggested the value of the land as Rs.80,000/-per acre. Since this land is sought to be alienated in favour of the 4th respondent, for an industrial purpose, the District Collector suggested that the land value be fixed at twice the said amount i.e., Rs.1,60,000/- per acre. This suggestion of the District Collector has been approved by the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh. However, he desired that the matter be considered by the Empowered Committee in detail. The Empowered Committee constituted for taking decisions with regard to the alienation of governments lands has agreed with the proposal of the District Collector for alienating these bits and pieces of lands in favour of the 4th respondent at the uniform rate of Rs.1,60,000/-per acre irrespective of it’s terrain. Then, the recommendation of the Empowered Committee has been studied by the State Government in its Revenue Department as well as Finance Department. The Revenue Department has also solicited the views of the Government in the Industries and Commerce Department. After the opinion of the Finance, Industries and Commerce Department has thus been secured, the Revenue Department has processed the file to the Hon’ble Minister for Revenue, who while approving the suggestion of the Department sought for the approval of the Hon’ble Chief Minister. The Hon’ble Chief Minister has accorded approval in principle to the proposal, but suggested that the matter be placed for consideration of the State Cabinet. Accordingly, the Chief Secretary has placed this subject matter for consideration of the 1116th Meeting of the Council of Ministers, which was held at 10.30 AM on 24.02.2009. Through Counsel Resolution No.137(62)/2009, the proposal has been approved. Thus, the decision for alienation of the land in favour of the 4th respondent has been studied carefully at various levels by the Government and ultimately, the matter has been placed for consideration of the State Cabinet and only after securing their approval for the proposal, the impugned GO has been issued alienating the land in favour of the 4th respondent @ Rs.1,60,000/-per acre uniformly. In view of this, it is difficult to agree with the contention that the land in question was alienated arbitrarily. 10. When we have considered the entire matter after thorough examination of the file produced by the learned Government Pleader, we are convinced that the assertions of the writ petitioner that the land value is of Rs.10 lakhs per acre is ill-founded. The sales statistics of lands in and around Khajapur Village of Medak District, in the past three years collected from the Sub-Registrar’s Office, Ramayampet, Medak District did not lend any credence to such an allegation. On the other hand, the sales took place for values ranging from Rs.14,000/- to Rs.40,000/-per acre. It is in fact the 4th respondent, who has purchased the land in the vicinity through a registered sale deed @ Rs.80,000/-per acre on 05.01.2008, that being the highest value paid for the land in the vicinity. The District Collector, therefore, suggested the land value to be fixed for alienation at double the said rate and thus worked out Rs.1,60,000/-. Therefore, we consider that the District Collector has fixed the land value appropriately and it is not a case of fixation of land value for purpose of conferring a favour on the 4th respondent. Similarly, the matter has been considered and examined by the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, the Empowered Committee constituted for the purpose of studying cases of alienation of government lands and followed up by the examination of the matter carefully by the Government in Revenue, Finance, Industries and Commerce Departments. The matter has also been placed before the Council of Ministers, who met on 24.02.2009 who approved the proposal for alienation. 11. We, therefore, find no merit in this writ petition and the averments and the contentions raised by the petitioner in the writ petition stood unsubstantiated, for want of any material in support thereof. Therefore, we have no hesitation to dismiss this writ petition but however, without costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, ACJ ____________________________ NOOTY RAMA MOHANA RAO, J Date:09.11.2011. sj