THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH Writ Petition No. 6108 OF 2005 DT. 31.3.2011 Between: Nalajala Veerabhadraiah and ors … Petitioners And The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam and ors … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Mummaneni Srinivasa Rao Counsel for respondents 1 to 3: G.P. for Revenue Counsel for respondent no.4 : Sri V Raghu The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH Writ Petition No. 6108 OF 2005 ORDER: The petitioners herein seek a writ of mandamus declaring the auction notification dated 25.1.2005 for auction of mango crop for the year 2005 on 5.2.2005 in respect of Ac.95.84 cents in various survey numbers in Munigepally village, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam district as illegal and without jurisdiction. The case of the petitioners is that they are members of joint family and are owners and possessors of the subject land but in the year 1975, the 5th respondent erroneously filed a declaration before the Land Reforms Authorities and pursuant thereto an order dated 24.4.1990 was passed holding 5th respondent as excess land holder to an extent of Ac.21.77 cents and possession of the same was taken on 7.12.1990 and the same was assigned to landless poor persons. Thereafter, the Government filed an appeal before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Warangal in LRA No. 69/94 and the same was allowed by order dated 6.10.1995 holding that 5th respondent is having surplus land to an extent of 2.0721 Standard Holding. Questioning the said order, the 5th respondent filed a revision in CRP No. 243 of 1996 and initially obtained interim stay orders and ultimately the said revision was dismissed by orders dated 8.6.2000 and the matter was carried in appeal before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 13580- 13581 of 2000 wherein initially an interim order to maintain status quo was granted and later the matter was remitted back to the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Warangal. Thus, it is stated that the lands of the petitioner in Survey Nos. 353/1 and 356, Munegepally village, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam district are not covered by the ceiling surplus and the same are different and distinct and petitioners are in possession of Ac.4.90 in Survey No. 353/1 and Ac.5.15 cents in Survey No. 356, Munegepalli village and the same do not form part of ceiling surplus lands of 5th respondent, therefore the auction notification is illegal and unsustainable. The first respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that admittedly the 5th respondent filed a declaration before the Land Reforms Tribunal, Khammam and the Tribunal has passed orders dated 18.10.1995 under Section 10 (2) of the Act and form.6 has been issued to the declarants to surrender the surplus lands to an extent of 2.0721 Standard Holdings i.e. Ac.95.84 cents. As the declarants failed to surrender the surplus lands, the Tribunal suo moto under Section 10 (4) of the Act issued form no.8 on 11.12.1995 and the same was published on 18.12.1995. As no objections were received by anybody within stipulated period, the Land Reforms Tribunal, Khammam issued orders under Section 10 (4) of the Act dated 8.1.1996 accepting Ac.102.50 cents of Munigepalli village towards surplus lands of the declarant in various survey numbers. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Khammam issued Form No.9 on 10.1.1996 and directed the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kusumanchi to take over possession of lands in form no.10 on 28.1.1996 of an extent of Ac.95.84 cents which includes Ac.14.38 cents in Survey No. 353 and Ac.5.15 in survey No. 356/A. It is stated that out of Ac.101.50 cents of land, possession over land to an extent of Ac.6.66 cents was already taken over and the same was assigned, as such the remaining land to an extent of Ac.95.84 was taken over possession on 28.1.1996 and it vests with the Government from that date. It is stated that as against the orders of the LRAT, Warangal in LRA No. 69/94, the 5th respondent filed a revision in CRP No. 243 of 1996 and the same was dismissed on 8.6.2000 and the further review in Review Petition No. 11705 of 2005 was also dismissed by orders dated 19.7.2000. As against the said orders, the matter was carried in appeal to Supreme Court wherein status quo orders were granted on 8.9.2000 and 10.9.2000. The declarants filed a contempt petition before the Supreme Court in Contempt Petition (C ) No. 127-128 of 2005 and the same was disposed of along with civil appeals by order dated 17.2.2009 wherein it was observed that one of the issues that requires consideration and has not been dealt with by the Land Reforms Tribunal, Khammam and Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Warangal is as to the date of death of Nagaiah’s father inasmuch as if he died after 1956, some land may fall to share of widow and if he had died prior thereto, she may not be entitled to any share and ultimately the Supreme Court set aside the orders passed in revision dated 8.6.2000 and remitted the matter to Lands Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Warangal. It is also stated that after issuing notice dated 25.1.2005 the auction was conducted on 5.2.2005 and the District Collector, Khammam has also confirmed the auction conducted by first respondent vide proceedings dated 10.3.2005 and the auction amount of Rs.44,300/- has been remitted into Government Account. It is further stated on remand from the Supreme Court, the matter is still pending consideration before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Warangal and the petitioners are at liberty to implead themselves, establish their right over the subject land and can seek deletion of the land claimed by them in Survey No.353/1 and Survey No. 356 to an extent of Ac.4.90 and Ac.5.15 cents respectively, possession of which was taken by Government on 28.1.1996. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Mr.V.Raghu for 4th respondent. Though, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the alleged possession taken over by the Government is merely a paper possession and actually the petitioners are in possession, it is well settled that such factual aspects cannot be dealt with by this Court. It is always open for the petitioners to agitate their rights by impleading themselves in the pending case before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Warangal, establish their right, title and possession over the subject land to an extent of Ac.4.90 in Survey No. 353/1 and Ac.5.15 cents in Survey No. 356, Munegepalli village and seek appropriate direction for deletion of the same. It is needless to mention that ultimately, if the petitioners succeed before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal in establishing their right, title and possession, it is open for them to claim appropriate compensation for the period they were deprived of their right over the property. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. _____________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE:31.3.2011 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH Writ Petition No. 6108 OF 2005 DT. 31.3.2011