THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.10167 of 2011 (Dated : 23-09-2011) Between: S.Shanthi and another …Petitioners A n d State of A.P., rep. by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.10167 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by Smt.S.Shanthi and Smt.S.Shanthamma questioning the validity of the proceeding in Lr.No.C3/788/2010, dated 30.03.2011 of the respondent-District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, whereby and whereunder, the proceeding No.C3/788/2010, dated 05-02-2011 issued by the District Revenue Officer, Ranga Reddy District, has been kept in abeyance. 2. The facts, in a nutshell, are:- 2(a) J.Venkatesham purchased agricultural land comprising Survey Nos.363, 364, 371 and 372 admeasuring Ac.51-06 guntas from Khaja Mohiuddin and fourteen others under registered sale deed dated 24-3-1965. J.Venkatesham applied for conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural land. His application came to be considered by the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District in Proceeding No.B1/14547/69, Dated 15-12-1969 and sanction was accorded under Section 61 of the A.P. Agricultural Land (Conversion for non- agricultural purpose) Act, 2006. The said Venkatesham and his family members converted agricultural lands into house plots and sold the plots to different persons. The 1st petitioner-Smt.S.Shanti purchased Plot Nos.62 and 63 admeasuring 496 and 567 square yards under registered sale deed dated 29-3-1995. The 2nd petitioner- Smt. S.Shantamma purchased Plot Nos.1 and 2 admeasuring 57 square yards under registered sale deed dated 31-12-1994; Plot Nos.60 and 61 admeasuring 533 square yards under registered sale deed dated 13-7-1995 and Plot No.3, 2 admeasuring 315 square yards under registered sale deed dated 14-11-1995. The total extent of house plots purchased by the petitioners 1 and 2 is 1950 square yards and the said plots are in Survey No.372. 2(b) M/s.Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited granted a retail outlet dealership to the petitioners and issued a letter of intent for a period of 15 years with a renewal option for another 15 years. The petitioners agreed to execute a lease deed in respect of the above said plots, pursuant to the letter of intent dated 28-01-2010. The District Revenue Officer, Ranga Reddy District, issued No Objection Certificate (“NoC”) for establishing MS/HSD Petrol & Diesel New Retail Outlet in the plots owned by the petitioners, vide Proceeding No.C3/788/2010, dated 05-02-2011. Subsequently, on the complaint allegedly filed by Y.Yadava Rao, the respondent-District Collector issued Proceedings Lr.No.C3/788/2010, Dated 30-03-2011, whereunder the earlier proceedings C3/788/2010, Dt.05-02-2011 granting NoC, is kept in abeyance. The validity of the said proceeding is challenged in this writ petition. 2(c) It is the plea of the petitioners that the writ petition in W.P.No.4779 of 2007 is not relatable to Sy.No.372 of Kanajiguda, Alwal Municipality and it relates to Sy.Nos.367 & 368 and therefore, the order passed in W.P.No.4779 of 2007 does not come in the way of granting NoC for establishing retail outlet in the plots owned by the petitioners. It is also the plea of the petitioners that the proceeding granting NoC came to be kept in abeyance without hearing them or receiving their explanation. For better understanding of grievance of the petitioners, I deem it appropriate to refer para (6) of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, which reads as hereunder:- “6) That while so, to the surprise and shock of the petitioners, the respondent has issued the impugned proceedings in Lr.No.C3/788/2010, dated 30.03.2011, and thereby kept his earlier proceedings No.C3/788/2010, dated 05.02.2011 in abeyance, by stating that the petitioners have not submitted conversion proceedings of land from agriculture to non-agriculture and more over the land in Sy.No.372 of Indiranagar, Alwal village, Malkajgiri Mandal, R.R District is found to be Inam land. It is submitted that after consideration the respondent has given NOC by proceedings dated 05.02.2011, but the impugned suo motu proceedings were issued without any basis and without giving any notice or opportunity to the petitioners before keeping the said proceedings in abeyance. It is submitted that the subject matter of the land is purely private patta lands and the same is evident from the title deeds and also the proceedings of the Tahsildar, Malkajgiri. It appears that the respondent is acting at the behest of the third parties contrary to the revenue records. The said action on the part of the respondent is bad, illegal and mala fide one and contrary to law. Therefore, the impugned proceedings dated 30.03.2011 are liable to be set aside. Hence, the writ petition.” 4(a). Rule nisi came to be ordered on 15-4-2011. The respondent entered appearance and filed counter. V.Seshadri, District Collector, Ranga Reddy District has sworn to the counter affidavit. 4(b). It is stated in the counter affidavit that the land admeasuring Ac.157.20 guntas comprising Sy.Nos.253 and 285 is Inam land and no Occupancy Rights Certificate (“ORC”) has been granted to any person. As per the provisions of the A.P (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 (in short, “Abolition of Inams Act”), the land is vested with the State and the State Government is the owner. The Joint Collector in File No.F1/1677/2004, dt.24-02-2007 set aside the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella granting ORC to an extent of Ac.16-12 and 11-29 in Sy.Nos.367 and 368 respectively situated at Alwal village, Malkajgiri. The old survey Nos. 253 and 285 are co-related to the new Sy.Nos.358, 359, 365 to 372. As per the revenue records, the land in these survey numbers has been shown as “kancha” at the time of abolition of imams and therefore, occupancy for this land cannot be registered, as per Section 4(1) of the Abolition of Inams Act. The order of the Joint Collector in cancelling the occupancy rights in respect of Sy.Nos.316, 7 and 368 came to be challenged by the aggrieved party in W.P.No.4779 of 2007 and the said writ petition ended in dismissal on 24-02-2007. The petitioners have not challenged the order of the Joint Collector in Proceeding No.F1/1677/2004, dated 24-02-2007. In these circumstances, NoC granted in Proceeding No.C3/788/2010 dated 5-2-2011 came to be kept in abeyance. 5. The writ petitioners filed reply affidavit. It is stated in the reply affidavit that the land bearing Sy.No.372 is not the subject matter in W.P.No.4779 of 2007 and there is no justification for the District Collector in keeping the proceeding dated 5-2-2011 in abeyance. 6. The petitioners moved W.P.M.P.No.29381 of 2011 to take up the writ petition on `out of turn’ basis. The respondents did not choose to oppose the petition and therefore, the said WPMP came to be allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing on 21-9-2011. 7. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not put on notice before keeping the proceedings dated 5-2-2011 in abeyance and therefore, the order impugned in the writ petition is liable to be set aside. A further submission has been made that W.P.No.4779 of 2007 relates to Sy.No.367 and 368 and therefore, the order passed therein cannot be a ground to keep the NoC in abeyance. Learned counsel would further contend that the District Collector called for the report from the Tahasildar, Malkajgiri and thereupon, the Tahsildar, Malkajgiri Mandal, submitted his report under Lr.B/1031/2010, Dt. -08-2011. The respondent-District Collector without considering the report, proceeded to keep the NoC in abeyance. In a way, his contention is that the earlier NoC came to be issued after getting clearance from all the departments concerned in which case; the said NoC cannot be kept in abeyance basing on the complaint of persons, who are ill-disposed towards the petitioners. Learned counsel refers the report of the Tahasildar, Malkajgiri, vide letter No.B/1031/2010, Dt. -8-2011. The relevant portion of the text of the letter on which much emphasis has been laid reads as hereunder:- “ The subject land is not attracted provisions of the A.P.Land Reforms (COAH) Act and ULC Act as per the Memo No.G/…/2008, Dated : 06-04-2009 issued by the S.O & C.A., U.L.C., Hyderabad. The subject land is Patta Land only but not Government Land, Evacuee Property, Enemy and Endowment Land. There is no government interest is involved over the subject property. The land in question is vacant land and the petitioners have not obtained the conversion proceedings from the RDO, Chevella Division and they have applied for conversion of land from Agriculture to Non-Agriculture and pending with the RDO Chevella Division. However, earlier the Joint Collector in Proceedings No.B1/14547/69, Dated 15-12-1969 issued orders for conversion of land in Sy.Nos.363, 364, 371 & 372 of Alwal village. The said orders were challenged before the Board of Revenue U/s. 158 of Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli and the Board of the Revenue dismissed the appeal in case No.U3/145/1971, Dated 03-04-1972 by confirming the orders of the Joint Collectors and the said orders of the Joint Collector have become final. To this effect, there is a recital in the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court at Page 8 in CRP 4796/1997, Dated: 15-06-2004 (copy enclosed) Sri T.Malhar Rao, Advocate filed an objection petition on behalf of his client Sri K.Mohan Reddy S/o late Ram Chandra Reddy R/o Kanajiguda H/o Alwal village stating that this client is the owner and protected tenant of the land in Sy.No.372 of Alwal village and some 3rd persons are trying to open HPCL retail outlet by filing fabricated documents. The learned counsel further stated that there is dispute over the said land and it is pending before the Hon’ble High Court of A.P., in CMP No.5413/2007 in CRP No.4796 of 1997 and this CRP No.4796/2007 and requested not to sanction any NOC till final disposal of the case. But the learned counsel has not submitted a copy of the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of A.P., in CMP No.5413/2007 in CRP No.4796 of 1997 was already been disposed off by an order dated : 15-06-2004 (copy enclosed). As far as ground position is concerned, the proposed land is located in Alwal GHMC limits surrounding area covered by commercial and residential complexes. The location sketch, relevant documents and the site plan duly attested are submitted herewith for kind perusal and further necessary action. In view of the above facts, the NOC may be considered for the proposed MS/HSD Petrol and Diesel New Retail outlet in Sy.No.372 of Alwal village subject to the result of the case pending before the Hon’ble High Court of A.P., in CMP 5413/2007 in CRP No.4796/1997.” 9. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue (TA) contends that Sy.Nos.255 and 285 admeasuring Ac.157-20 gts are correlatable to Sy.Nos.358, 359 and 372 and the lands in these survey numbers are inam lands and no occupancy right certificates could be granted to any person, in which case, the order passed by the District Collector keeping the earlier NoC in abeyance is justified. A further submission has been made that the orders passed by the Joint Collector in cancelling the Occupancy Rights Certificates issued in favour of certain persons came to be confirmed by this Court in W.P.No.4779 of 2007 and the petitioners herein have not chosen to challenge the orders passed by the Joint Collector. 10. I have gone through the proceeding challenged in this writ petition. The respondent-District Collector kept the NoC issued on 5- 2-2011 in abeyance. It indicates that NoC has been kept in abeyance, in view of the pendency of some enquiry. It appears that the Tahasildar, Malkajgiri Mandal submitted a report, consequent on the representation of Sri Y.Yadava Rao, dated 07-3-2011. The Tahasildar, Malkajgiri narrated the nature of the land claimed by the petitioners and also referred the subject matter of the lands in W.P.No.4779 of 2007. His report is explicit that Sy.No.372 of Kanajiguda is not subject matter of W.P.No.4779 of 2007. As on this day, the respondent-District Collector received the report of the Tahasildar, Malkajgiri Mandal. Therefore, the District Collector has to consider the report submitted by the Tahasildar and examine whether the proceeding issued on 5-2-2011 is required to be cancelled or the order dated 30-3-2011 keeping the proceeding dated 5-2-2011 is required to be recalled. 11. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent-District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, to consider the report submitted by the Tahasildar, Malkajgiri Mandal, in Lr.No.B/1031/2010, dt. -8-2010 and pass appropriate orders afresh, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to weeks. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.23-09-2011 *RAR