IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL No: 7 of 2010 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 18.03.2009 in WP.No.28712 of 1998 on the file of the High Court.) BETWEEN: Ramchandra Singh and 25 others. ... APPELLANTS AND Government of Andhra Pradesh, Through its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and 18 others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants: MR.S. MEHERCHAND NOORI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE DHANANJAY REDDY (SC FOR HUDA) The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar) The unsuccessful petitioners in W.P.No.28712 of 1998 have filed this appeal. By the writ petition, as aforesaid, the appellants had questioned the order of the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District in File No.B3/7572/95 dated 29.01.1997 and had sought further relief that the Joint Collector be directed to consider the case of the petitioners as per the letter/representation dated 17.08.1950 addressed by the first Collector, Hyderabad to the Secretary, Board of Revenue, Government of Andhra Pradesh and other material on record. 2. The facts in brief are that three different groups of appellants had filed WP.No.435 of 1988 before this Court claiming that they are occupants of various extents of Manikonda Jagir village and seeking grant of pattedari rights to them under the rules framed under the Hyderabad (Abolition of Jagirs) Regulation 1358 Fasli; similar WP.No.17305 of 1987 was filed by another group of petitioners and another WP.No.10502 of 1988 was filed by yet another group of petitioners seeking similar relief for grant of patta. This Court by order dated 21.06.1995 disposed of the said writ petitions by a common order directing the Collector, Ranga Reddy District to dispose of the representations made by the petitioners after holding an enquiry to find out as to whether the petitioners are in possession and whether they are entitled to pattedari rights under the aforesaid rules. There were similar writ petitions filed by other group of persons claiming another part of the land of the said Manikonda village in different survey numbers. Their cases were also directed to be examined by this Court by a separate order in WP.No.8583 of 1993 dated 20.06.1994. 3. In pursuance of the aforesaid orders the Joint Collector issued notices to all the parties and a counsel appeared on their behalf. Petitioners also filed various documents. The learned Joint Collector called for and examined all the revenue records and after due enquiry found that the cultivation by the persons is not continuous and many of the occupants were found to be in possession only recently from the year 1980-81 onwards. He also found that they were not cultivating the lands from 1984-85 onwards. The Joint Collector also found that under the Hyderabad (Abolition of Jagirs) Regulation 1358 Fasli read with Government’s circular No.2 dated 18.10.1949 regarding grant of pattedari rights to the occupants of Jagir villages, the person in possession has to satisfy that he was holding the Jagir lands and paying revenue directly to the Jagirdar to qualify in the definition of ‘occupant’ under the said circular No.2 referred to above. With reference to revenue record the Joint Collector recorded the following observations: “…The settlement records, viz the Classer Register, Akarbandi and Sethwar have been verified. The Classer Register prepared at the time of initial survey in 1319-F i.e. 1910 A.D. have been verified. According to the Classer Register the lands in Sy.No.203, 210, 211 and 212 are shown as poramboke i.e. Government land. The Akarbandi register prepared after survey in the year 1321-F i.e. 1912 A.D. has been verified. The entries in Akarbandi register in respect of the suit lands also reveal that the lands are recorded as poramboke. The Sethwar of Manikonda village was prepared in the year 1322-F i.e. 1912 A.D. According to the Sethwar, the lands bearing Sy.No.203 measuring Ac.207.35 gts, Sy.No.210 measuring Ac429.14 gts. Sy.No.211 measuring Ac.288.30 gts, Sy.No.212 measuring Ac.124.31 gts are recorded as poramboke (Government land). The records referred to above were prepared prior to abolition of Jagirs, i.e. 15-9-1949. The Government was the absolute owner for the suit lands even during the regime of Jagirdars. Therefore the request of the petitioners for grant of patta will not come under the purview of rules of Pattedari rights framed under the Jagir Abolition Act, 1358-F. In the Jagir villages the Jagirdar has no right to grant any patta in respect of Government lands since the Jagirdar was only entitled to enjoy usufructs. The suit lands during the Jagir tenure itself were vested with the Government and after the abolition of Jagirs also they continued to be vested with the State Government.” 4. The Joint Collector, therefore, concluded that the patta rights cannot be claimed by any of the parties and even the assignment also cannot be claimed, as the lands are situated within the radius of 10 miles from the Municipal limits of Hyderabad and assignment of such lands was prohibited from 1961 itself vide G.O.Ms.No.1122 dated 30.06.1961 and consequently, rejected the requests of all the petitioners. 5. The said order was challenged by a Writ of Certiorari, as mentioned above. The learned single Judge considered the said writ petition and under the impugned judgment dated 18.03.2009 came to the conclusion that no error warranting correction under Certiorari jurisdiction is made out by the petitioners and consequently, dismissed the writ petition, however, with an observation that it is open for the petitioners to apply for the benefit of the recent policy of the Government under G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 16.02.2008 with regard to regularization of all encroachments of Government lands. Against the aforesaid order of the learned single Judge it appears that the petitioners were advised to approach the Hon’ble Supreme Court and accordingly, they filed SLP (Civil) bearing C.C.No.13761 of 2009 and when the said SLP was heard on 27.11.2009 the petitioners sought leave to withdraw the SLP with liberty to approach this Court by this Letters Patent Appeal. The said leave having been granted, the present appeal was filed by the petitioners. 6. We have heard Mr. Meher Chand Noori, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners/appellants and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the learned Joint Collector has not examined the documents produced by the petitioners and as such, the conclusion of the learned Joint Collector that they are recent occupants of the land etc. is factually incorrect. Petitioners sought to place reliance upon the copies of the documents emanating from the Jagir whereunder lease of Kancha i.e. grass cultivation was granted to ancestors of some of the petitioners. Learned counsel also contended that their cases ought to have considered with reference to circular No.2 referred to above and they are entitled to pattedari rights. 8. We have, however, noticed from the documents produced along with the writ appeal that the Revenue Minister, Government of Andhra Pradesh, on the application of Sheethal Singh and other ryots of Nanakramguda village, passed an order dated 03.05.1954 for cultivation of identified lands by directing their names to be entered as the Sivai Jamabandi Patta to the extent of the land meant for landless. Some of the petitioners made their claims through the said Seethal Singh. This order itself discloses that the occupants were treated as having status of Sivai Jamabandi Patta which in other words mean that the lands belong to Government and as such, there is no Jamabandi with regard to said lands. However, Sivai Jamabandi i.e. other than Jamabandi in lieu of recovery of land revenue is charged to the occupant for occupying such Government land. The payment of Sivai Jamabandi, therefore, would by itself establish that the land is a Government land and as such, a person holding Sivai Jamabandi Patta cannot claim any pattedari rights as he is cultivating under the permission of the Government. Even otherwise the learned counsel for the appellants is unable to establish any perversity or error of appreciation in the findings reached by the learned Joint Collector, particularly, on the basis of the revenue records, which are extracted as above. From the said revenue record it is evident that even during the tenure of Jagirdar, the lands in question were Government lands, as recorded in the settlement, Akarbandi and Sethwar of 1319-F i.e. 1910 A.D. to subsequent Fasli years 1321-F i.e. 1912 A.D. as well as 1322-Fasli i.e. 1912 A.D. also states that the lands in question are Poramboke (Government land). In that view of the matter the lands in question not being Jagir lands at all, the question of considering the applications of the petitioners for pattadar rights under the abolition of Jagir regulations referred to above does not arise. We are, therefore, unable to find any reason to take a different view from the one taken by the learned single Judge. The writ appeal is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ V.V.S. RAO, J _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J June 23, 2010 DSK