HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.707 of 2003 DATE:14-12-2010 BETWEEN Mekala Venkata Subba Rao. …Appellant AND The Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & Others …Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.707 of 2003 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent is directed against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court in dismissing W.P.No.6564 of 2003, dated 16.4.2003 filed by the appellant on the ground that the writ petitioner had no locus standi to question the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kalla Mandal, dated 11.1.2003 in granting patta to 6th respondent in respect of land to an extent of Ac.0.75 cents in R.S.No.353/9B2 and R.S.No.353/9B4, situated at Peda Amiran Village. Facts, which give rise to filing the writ petition, in brief, are as under: The writ petitioner-appellant herein filed the above writ petition in the form of public interest litigation questioning the assignment of dry land to an extent of Ac.0.75 cents in R.S.No.353/9B2 and R.S.No.353/9B4, situated at Peda Amiran Village, which is under the control of the gram panchayat, in favour of 6th respondent under freedom fighters quota by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kalla-4th respondent herein on 11.1.2003. Petitioner contends that in the year 1976 the said site was given to Veterinary department for the purpose of construction of a veterinary hospital, that the maternal grandfather of the petitioner, one Karri Subbarao got constructed a pucca building in the said land for the said veterinary hospital and donated the same to the Animal Husbandry Department by virtue of a gift deed, dated 11.11.1970 pursuant to the proceedings in Roc. B1.11964/70 Rev., dated 2.10.1970 issued by the District Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru and that the Government also accepted the said gift. Thus ever since the year 1970 the said site and the building are being used for running veterinary hospital for the village and the surrounding villages and that the said land is also being used for communal purpose for the benefit of all the villagers. While so, 6th respondent describing herself as wife of late Appala Raju, freedom fighter applied for grant of patta in her favour in respect of the said land. By using influence, 6th respondent prevailed over respondents 2 to 4 and got the things done in a jet speed and got the land converted from “cattle stand poramboke” to “assessed waste dry” for the purpose of assignment. Before converting the land from “cattle stand poramboke” to “assessed waste dry”, the revenue authorities did not refer the matter to the gram panchayat for giving publicity in the village by way of Tom-Tom as per the Board Standing Order 15 and that no notice of the same was affixed in the Village Chavidi as stipulated therein. The gram panchayat never passed any resolution accepting the proposal for conversion of classification of the land, and that as per Board Standing Order No.15 (3) 4 (ii) the communal lands should not be assigned. It is alleged that completely giving a go by to the said procedure, the authorities assigned the land in favour of 6th respondent in a haste manner which is liable to be set aside. By the impugned order, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition at the admission stage. It was held that the petitioner, who is a resident of Peda Amiran is not a rival candidate for assignment of the said land and therefore, he has no locus standi to question the impugned order. It was held that even the other contention that the said assignment is illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 58 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short ‘Act’) also does not merit consideration for the reason that the government porambokes shall vest in gram panchayat as per sub-section (1) of Section 58 of the Act. But the same fiction does not apply, if the government is of the opinion that the land is required for some public purpose, in such an event, a notification is necessary as required under sub-section (2) of Section 58 of the Act. The condition of issue of notification divesting gram panchayat on certain lands mentioned there is not a condition precedent for assigning any land to freedom fighter. Since late Appala Raju was a freedom fighter and he was entitled to Ac.5.00 of land, being his widow, 6th respondent made a request and accordingly, the land in Peda Amiran was assigned. Therefore, at the instance of a person who has no locus standi, the validity of the assignment cannot be gone into. Pending the writ appeal, respondents 1 to 4 filed a counter affidavit inter alia denying the value of the land assigned in favour of 6th respondent. It is stated that the land to an extent of Ac.1.07 cents situated in Pedamiram Village, Kalla Mandal is classified as cattle stand poramboke in the revenue records in the year 1965. In the said land, a village sub-centre was constructed from the funds donated by one Karre Subbarao and subscriptions received from the public. The Livestock Officer of Animal Husbandry Department, Rajahmundry addressed a letter to the District Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru vide letter No.1526-C/67, dated 25.8.1970 requesting him to transfer the land admeasuring Ac.1.07 cents in R.S.No.353/9B and also the building constructed therein for establishing Fodder Demonstration Centre. But the District Collector rejected the said request on the ground that as per G.O.Ms.No.934, Revenue (P) Department, dated 27.9.1969 the District Collector is competent only to transfer the vacant government land but not the land and building and that the building constructed with the public funds would be gifted to the Animal Husbandry Department, and that the gift deed has got to be registered and the same shall also be approved by the government and till then the transfer of the land and the building cannot be considered. Later, a gift deed was registered by Karre Subbarao in favour of the Veterinary Department vide registered document No.2531/1970 and that the government vide memo, dated 28.3.1974 have accepted the gift of the building. Subsequently, on 30.6.1976 the gram panchayat passed a resolution No.18, permitting the Veterinary sub-centre to use the land admeasuring Ac.1.07 cents covered by R.S.No.353/9B as Fodder Demonstration Centre. Subsequently, neither the Veterinary Department nor the Livestock Officer of the sub-centre has applied for transfer of the said land in their favour and that the land is being continued to be as “cattle stand poramboke” in revenue records. On a representation submitted by 6th respondent to the District Collector on 28.8.2001 stating that an extent of Ac.2.51 cents, in Duvva Village of Tanuku Mandal was assigned in favour of her late husband and requested for assignment of balance extent of Ac.2.49 cents. The then Mandal Revenue Officer, Kalla Mandal has identified the land admeasuring Ac.0.75 cents in R.S.No.353/9B after excluding the land admeasuring Ac.0.25 cents, which is used as Veterinary hospital and that the same was proposed for assignment in favour of 6th respondent. Before submitting the proposal for change of classification of land for assignment in favour of 6th respondent has got published A1 notice in the village and the same was affixed on the notice board of the gram panchayat and also got the same announced in the village by beat of Tom-Tom (dandora). The Sarpanch of gram panchayat, on receipt of the notice, gave a letter on 30.11.2002 to the Mandal Revenue Officer stating that the gram panchayat has no objection for assignment of the land in favour of 6th respondent. On receipt of said ‘no objection’, the Mandal Revenue Officer sent proposals to the Revenue Divisional Officer for assignment of the land in favour of 6th respondent and change of classification of the land from “cattle stand poramboke” to ”assessed waste dry”, vide his letter, dated 8.12.2002. Accordingly, the Revenue Divisional Officer vide his proceedings, dated 7.1.2003 issued orders converting the land from “cattle stand poramboke” to “assessed waste dry” with a direction to the Mandal Revenue Officer to grant D-Form patta to 6th respondent. Pursuant to the same, the Mandal Revenue Officer vide his proceedings, dated 11.1.2003 granted D-Form patta in favour of 6th respondent. It was stated that the Sarpanch of the gram panchayat has attested the A.1 notice and he has also addressed a letter to the Mandal Revenue Officer stating that the gram panchayat has no objection for assignment of the land in favour of 6th respondent. On 10.3.2003, the President and the Vice- President of the gram panchayat and some of the villagers have submitted an application to the Mandal Revenue Officer opposing the assignment in favour of 6th respondent, but earlier, the Sarpanch of the gram panchayat has attested the A1 notice and he had also addressed a letter to the Mandal Revenue Officer stating that the gram panchayat has no objection for assignment of the land in favour of 6th respondent. For the reasons best known to him, the Sarpanch has got passed the resolution, dated 12.3.2003. The Assistant Director, Veterinary Department, Bhimavaram addressed a letter to the Mandal Revenue Officer, marking a copy of the same to the District Collector, wherein he had objected for granting of patta without obtaining permission of the Animal Husbandry Department and requested for cancellation of the same, vide his letter, dated 18.3.2003. The Mandal Revenue Officer submitted a report to the Revenue Divisional Officer on the representation of the gram panchayat stating that at the time of A1 notice, none of the persons objected for assignment of the land in favour of 6th respondent, vide his letter, dated 11.3.2003. Thereupon the Revenue Divisional Officer as per the directions of the Joint Collector, through his letter, dated 29.3.2003 submitted a report to the District Collector stating that at no point of time, no person of the village and gram panchayat has objected for assignment of the land in favour of 6th respondent, but however, the Revenue Divisional Officer requested the District Collector to examine the desirability of canceling or confirming the assignment and pass suitable orders. Therefore, the District Collector ordered for an enquiry into the matter and the same is pending. Upa-Sarpanch of 5th respondent-gram panchayat filed a counter supporting the claim of the writ petitioner stating that the Joint Collector recorded his statement apart from the statements given by them voluntarily, and that the enquiry is still pending before the Joint Collector and no orders are passed in view of the status quo orders passed by this Court. Sri Shasha Sai, learned counsel for the appellant contends that under Board Standing Order No.15, assignment of the land which is earmarked for communal purpose particularly classified as “cattle stand poramboke” is prohibited, that the manner in which the conversion was ordered on 7.1.2003 from “cattle stand poramboke” to “assessed waste dry” and granting of patta on 11.1.2003 by the Mandal Revenue Officer shows that the officers are bent upon to assign the valuable land in favour of 6th respondent and without notice to the Animal Husbandry Department, the land which was earmarked and allotted to them cannot be converted into assessed waste dry. He also brought to the notice of this Court the letter addressed by the Assistant Director of Animal Husbandry Department to the Collector, dated 8.4.2003, wherein he stated that the land is under occupation of Animal Husbandry Department from the year 1960 onwards and that the said land is utilized as Fodder Plot as well as R.L.U. Pedamiram village till date. It was stated therein that the Animal Husbandry Department is auctioning the Fodder Plot as well as coconut trees and the auction amount is also being remitted to the government through challans. Finally it was requested that the said land is required to the Animal Husbandry Department for routine Department activities. The Panchayat Secretary also requested the Collector about passing the resolution on 12.3.2003 and requested that the land is required for construction of panchayat building, school building etc. In view of the same, the Sarpanch issued a letter opposing the letter issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer without authorization of him, that mere attestation of A.1 notice cannot be taken into consideration for conversion of the land from “cattle stand poramboke” to “assessed waste dry”. Board Standing Order No.15 (3) 4 (ii) prohibits assignment of poramboke (tank-beds, fore-shore of tank-beds) cattle stands, grazing lands and reserved lands etc. Only tank-bed lands, fore- shore lands and lands under category (g), (j), (k) and (m), if not immediately required or if their occupation is not objectionable at present, they may be leased with a condition for resumption, when required for any public purpose without payment of any compensation. Whenever applications for assignment of lands classified as porambokes are received, it should be examined whether the lands are really required for the purpose for which they were originally set apart, or for any other purpose, and if they are not so required, steps should be taken to convert them to ayan and assign them. Once the assignment of cattle stand land is prohibited under Board Standing Order No.15 (3) 4 (ii) (a), whether the conversion of the subject-land into assessed waste dry land by the authorities without there being any resolution passed by the gram panchayat is valid or not has to be decided by the District Collector. Inasmuch as the District Collector is already seized of the matter, Sri B.Adinarayana Rao, learned counsel appearing for 6th respondent contends that let the District Collector may decide the said issue whether the assignment made in favour of 6th respondent is valid or not after giving an opportunity to the petitioner as well as 6th respondent. Under those circumstances, the District Collector-2nd respondent shall enquire into the validity of the assignment of land made in favour of 6th respondent including the validity of conversion of the land from “cattle stand poramboke” to “assessed waste dry” and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Until the final orders are passed by the District Collector-2nd respondent, status quo with regard to the property shall be maintained in all respects. The Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. _________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J. DECEMBER 14, 2010 Tsr.