THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28928 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner, a registered trust, is said to have been allotted land admeasuring Ac.13-31 guntas in Survey No.72 at Battisawargoan Village, Adilabad Mandal and District, on payment of market value. G.O.Ms.No.602 dated 31.07.1999 was issued by the Government whereby a decision was taken to alienate the land in favour of the petitioner on payment of market value of Rs.10,000/- per acre subject to certain conditions which included, among others, that 50% of the seats should be earmarked for children charging them the same fee as in Government schools. The Mandal Revenue Officer issued proceedings dated 26.08.1999 calling upon the petitioner to pay Rs.1,37,750/-, which the petitioner claims to have paid by challan dated 28.08.1999. It is the petitioner’s case that, thereafter, possession of land was handed over to them by way of a panchanama, and their name was recorded in the revenue records as pattadar in the year 2009. They also claim to have constructed a building of about 55,000 Square Feet, and to be running a school in the said premises. They also claim to have obtained permission from the Regional Joint Director of School Education, and to have been provided facilities like water tank, toilets etc., for the school children studying in their school. While matters stood thus the fourth respondent issued show- cause notice dated 29.06.2011 stating that it was not the petitioner but Sri Krishnaveni Residential School which was running a school in the alienated land during the last year and, as such, the conditions of alienation stipulated by the Government had been violated. The petitioner was asked to show cause why the land of an extent of Ac.13- 31 guntas should not be resumed to the Government for violation of the conditions. The petitioner was asked to submit their explanation, with documentary evidence, within 60 days. The show-cause notice dated 29.06.2011 is under challenge in this Writ Petition on the ground that the fourth respondent lacks jurisdiction either to issue a show-cause notice, or to take action against the petitioner, even if the conditions of alienation have been violated. Sri Peri Prabhakar, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would place reliance on the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Alienation of State Lands and Land Revenue Rules, 1975 (for short, “the Rules”). Under Rule 6 (a) (2) of the Rules every grant of alienation of State land for any public purpose is subject to the condition that the Government may resume the land wholly or in part with any building in the event of infringement of any of the conditions of the grant and, in case there are any buildings on the land, the Government may direct the grantee to remove them. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that while the Government may have the power, in case the petitioner has violated the conditions of alienation, to take appropriate action under the aforementioned Rules, the fourth respondent lacks jurisdiction to do so. When the matter came up for admission on 29.10.2011, Learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments) sought time to obtain instructions. The matter again suffered adjournment on 02.11.2011 to enable the Learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions. Today the Learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments), on instructions, would fairly state that, while the Rules enable the Government to initiate action and to resume the land for violation of the conditions of the grant of alienation, the fourth respondent does not have the jurisdiction to take action; and the impugned show-cause notice suffers from inherent lack of jurisdiction. Recording the submission of the Learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments), and as the impugned show-cause notice suffers from inherent lack of jurisdiction, the said proceedings are quashed. It is made clear that this order shall not preclude the Government, if they so choose, to take action for violation of the conditions of alienation in accordance with the Rules mentioned hereinabove. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J November 08, 2011 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28928 OF 2011 November 08, 2011 MD