HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.5833 of 2008 Date: June 23, 2011 Between: APSRTC Employees Union Welfare Association, (Regd.No.126), Puttur, Chittoor District, represented by its Secretary K.Raja Reddy, S/o.K.V.Reddyappa Reddy, aged about 54 years, R/o.D.No.13-13-A, Jandaman Street, Puttur, Chittoor District … Petitioner And The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District and others … Respondents Order: This writ petition is filed by the APSRTC Employees Union Welfare Association, Puttur, Chittoor District, questioning order dated 29-02-2008, issued in proceedings Roc.No.E2/3698/2005, by the first respondent-District Collector, Chittoor. By the aforesaid order, the District Collector, Chittoor, rejected the representation of the petitioner- association seeking alienation of land covered by Sy.No.79/2, admeasuring Ac.4.00 cents, situated in Puttur village and town of Chittoor District. It is the case of the petitioner-association that it had purchased the aforesaid extent of land out of Ac.5.11 cents in Sy.No.79/2, an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.63/9 and Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.23 of Puttur town from the previous owners by paying consideration of Rs.81,000/- and later divided the entire land into house- plots. It is stated that when members of the petitioner- association were trying to construct houses, third respondent-Tahsildar, Puttur Mandal, obstructed such construction on the ground that the land in Sy.No.79/2 was originally assigned to Smt.Laxmamma. It is the case of the petitioner that its members were not aware of the assignment of the said land to Smt.Laxmamma at the time of purchasing the same; as such they made representation to the respondents to grant pattas to them. When their representation was not considered, earlier, they filed W.P.No.21652 of 2006 before this Court, which was disposed of by order dated 27-10-2006 directing the District Collector, Chittoor, to consider the said representation and pass appropriate orders. Consequent upon the same, the impugned order has been passed declining to consider the request of the petitioner- association. The grievance of the petitioner-association is that the impugned order is passed without assigning valid reasons. It is stated that petitioner-association has purchased the land in question by way of agreement of sale for a valid consideration on 04-05-1988 from its owner Smt.Dhanamma, who has earlier purchased the same from Smt.D.Laxmamma. It is stated as much as the land was carved out into plots, the first respondent-District Collector ought to have considered alienation in favour of the petitioner- association. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by Tahsildar, Puttur Mandal, Chittoor District on behalf of the respondents. While denying the allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated in the counter-affidavit that as the original assignee violated the conditions of grant of assignment, the land was resumed after following due process of law on 19-07-2004 for the purpose of providing house-sites to weaker sections in Puttur town. It is further stated that members of the petitioner-association raised temporary structures in the land in question. It is stated that consequent upon the directions of this Court, the representation of the members of the petitioner- association was considered and the impugned order is passed rejecting the same as the land in Sy.No.79/2 admeasuring Ac.5.13 cents of Puttur Mandal is within the municipal limits of Puttur and within 1 Km. radius of Mandal headquarters; as such it attracts ban imposed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.634 Revenue (Assgn-III) Department dated 02-07-1990. It is further stated that the land in question is required for public purpose and more than 5,000 house plots are required under Indiramma Housing Programme. In this case, it is to be noted that the order resuming the land is not the subject-matter. Though the land in question was initially assigned to one Smt.Laxmamma, it is later sold to Smt.Dhanamma by way of agreement of sale. The petitioner-association claims purchase of the said land from Smt.Dhanamma, who has purchased the same in contravention of the conditions of grant of assignment to the original assignee Smt.Laxmamma. When the transfer of the land was found in violation of the conditions of grant of assignment, the same was resumed to the Government on 19-11-2004. As already noted above, the order resuming the land in question to the Government is not the subject-matter of the writ petition. The impugned order is passed in compliance of the directions of this Court, by considering the representation of the petitioner-association. In the impugned order itself, it is clearly stated that there is a ban for alienation of the land in question as the same is situated in the municipal limits of Puttur and within 1 Km. radius of Mandal headquarter. The representation of the petitioner- association is rejected by the impugned order referring to the ban imposed by the Government. Such ban is imposed to safeguard the lands which are surrounding urban areas. Therefore, it cannot be said that no valid reason has been assigned in the impugned order for rejecting the representation of the petitioner-association. Except stating that members of the petitioner-association carved out the land in question into house-plots, there is no other legal and valid basis to seek directions to the respondents to alienate the land in question in favour of the petitioner-association. Moreover, in the counter- affidavit, it is stated that the land in question is required for public purpose, namely, for providing house-sites to weaker sections under Indiramma Housing Scheme. When the intention of the Government is to utilize the land in question for a public purpose, there can neither be any directions to the respondents to alienate the same in favour of the petitioner-association nor can the impugned order be declared illegal. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) June 23, 2011 MRR