Telangana High Court
Smt. K. Jyothi W/O K. Raghuram Reddy vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. ... on 1 April, 2025
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR
+ W.P.No.5455 of 2008
% 01.04.2025
# Between:
Smt.K. Jyothi, W/o.K. Raghuram Reddy,
aged about 34 years, Occ:Advocate,
R/o.2-3-330, Sainagar, Nagole,
Ranga Reddy District and others
Petitioners
VERSUS
The Government of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Secretariat,
Hyderabad and others
Respondents
! Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sri T. Srikanth Reddy, learned
counsel representing Ms.K.
Hemalatha
learned counsel for petitioners
^Counsel for the respondent(s):
Learned Government Pleader for Revenue for R-1 to R-7
Sri V. Narasimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel for R-8
Sri Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel for R-9
<GIST:
> HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred
1) (2015) 3 Supreme Court Cases 695
2) 1995 (3) ALT 330 (S.B.)
3) (2001) 6 SCC 496
NVSK,J
W.P.No.5455 of 2008
2
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.5455 of 2008
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to quash order of the Joint Collector / respondent No.4, dated 10.01.2008 in proceedings in Case No.F1/173/2004 passed by respondent No.4 in Appeal, which has been filed by respondent No.6 / the Mandal Revenue Officer - cum - Deputy Commissioner, Saroornagar Mandal, R.R. District and seeking consequential direction to pay compensation to the petitioners, in accordance with the earlier decisions of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.24627 of 1998, W.P.No.22620 of 1998 and W.P.No.19632 of 2001.
2. Heard Sri T. Srikanth Reddy, learned counsel representing Ms.K. Hemalatha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 7, Sri V. Narasimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 3 appearing for respondent No.8 and Sri Srinivas Rao Pachwa, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.9. Perused the record.
3. Facts in brief are as follows:
The petitioners, who are 48 in number, are claiming as the owners of various extents of land comprising of Sy.Nos.250 to 260 and 263 to 304 of Karmanghat village, Saroornagar Mandal. It is their case that the earlier Pattas were granted to their predecessors and the title of the petitioners were purported to be cancelled by the impugned order.
4. It is submitted that originally lands situated in Sy.Nos.250 to 260 and 263 to 304 were the Inam lands granted to one Mr. Khasimuddin Hussain, the predecessor in title of respondent Nos.10 to 14. Respondent No.15 was recognized and recorded as the protected tenant on the said lands. Certain disputes arose between said Inamdar(Khasimuddin Khan) and NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 4 tenant - Mr.V. Bikshapathy Reddy / respondent No. 15, which were ultimately settled and adjudicated by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide its order, dated 18.12.1967 passed in C.R.P.No.1343 of 1966.
5. In the meantime, the provisions relating to grant of pattadar rights under the AP (TA) Inams Abolition Act, 1955 have been implemented with effect from 01.01.1973. Thereafter the Inamdar Mr.Khasimuddin and respondent No.15 applied for grant of pattadari rights (ORC) in respect of their respective extents in the subject lands in the same proportion as adjudicated upon by this Hon'ble High Court in its Order, dated 18.12.1967 in CRP No.1343 of 1966. Thereafter, the Collector as the appellate authority and the Sub Collector as Tribunal under the Inams Abolition Act had refused to grant Occupancy Rights Certificate (Pattas) to the predecessors in title of the petitioners viz., respondent Nos.10 to 15. Later, they filed W.P.No.4212 of 1979 before this Court NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 5 and vide order, dated 29.01.1980, this Court directed the respondent Nos.3 and 5 to grant Occupancy Rights Certificate (ORC) to respondent Nos.10 to 15 in proportion to the rights as decided in CRP No.1343 of 1966, dated 18.12.1967. Thereafter vide proceedings, dated 03.05.1980 respondent Nos.3 to 5 ordered issuance of Occupancy Rights Certificate to the extent of 55% to respondents Nos.10 to 14 and 45% to respondent No.15 vide Certificate, dated 06.06.1980. Thereafter, following the proceedings of the Tribunal, dated 30.05.1980 Certificates, dated 06.06.1980 were issued.
6. It is further submitted that in pursuance of the final order of patta (ORC) under the Inams Abolition Act, the pattas were also implemented and mutated in the revenue records vide proceedings, dated 07.06.1989 by the Madal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar Mandal under the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971.
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 6
7. It is further submitted that by virtue of the said orders, respondent No.10 to 15 had transferred their right, title and interest in favour of various petitioners by virtue of several documents. In the meanwhile, Respondent Nos.1 to 9 have purported to raise the level of Tank Bund and weir on the Saroornagar tank in the year 1996 for the purpose of increasing its capacity under the guise of improving the environment and beautification of the lake and surroundings as a part of the larger scheme of beautification of the city and accordingly the respondents have bunded the land on the front side of the tank naming it as "Necklace Road" while allowing the upper area to flow into the tank resulting in submergence to an extent of Ac.48-38 gts., out of the said extent of land, situated in Sy.Nos.263 to 271, 274, 292 and 303, thereby depriving the petitioners lands an extent of Ac.48.30 guntas.
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 7
8. Thereafter petitioners have filed W.P.Nos.24627 and 22620 of 1998 and W.P.No.19632 of 2001 in different batches. In all the said writ petitions, this Hon'ble Court directed all the respondents to take steps for paying compensation to the petitioners by process of acquisition of land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Petitioners further submit that no appeal has been filed against the said orders, therefore, the said orders have become final.
9. It is submitted that HUDA and the Municipal authorities have decided to acquire the land and issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and sanctioned a sum of Rs.4.32 crores as compensation, which was apportioned between HUDA and Municipal Authorities.
10 It is further submitted that when the petitioners were awaiting the initiation of the land acquisition proceedings, they received a notice dated 10.01.2008 NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 8 from the Joint Collector / respondent No. 4 who had entertained an appeal filed by respondent No.6 who were parties to the final order of this Court dated 29.01.1980 in W.P.No.4212 of 1979. The said notice was issued condoning the delay of 24 years and suspending the patta/ORC, proceedings dated 30.05.1980 issued in favour of the predecessors in title of the petitioners.
11. The petitioners specific case is that the Joint Collector has condoned the delay of 24 years under Section 5 of Limitation Act and entertained the appeal of the respondent No.6 against the proceedings dated 30.05.1980 without issuing any notice either to the petitioners or to their predecessors in title.
12. Questioning the same, the petitioners filed this Writ Petition challenging the validity, legality, propriety of the impugned order and particularly the jurisdiction of respondent Nos.4 and 6 on the following grounds:
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 9
i) That the respondents No.4 has no power or authority whatsoever either to entertain an appeal after a period of 24 years without even hearing the petitioners or their predecessors in title.
ii) That the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.4212 of 1979, dated 29.01.1980 operates as resjudicata and the impugned order is contrary to the Judgment and final order of this Hon'ble Court dated 29.1.1980 in W.P.No.4212 of 1979.
13. That the submergence of land is much later to the grant of Patta (ORC) in respect of the lands to the predecessors in title of the petitioners which was done in the year 1980 and the submergence was caused by the respondents by raising bund and weir of the Saroornagar tank on the northern and eastern side and by constructing the so called Necklace Road on the Western and Southern side in the year 1997-1998.
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 10
14. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that an appeal under Section 24 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Inams Abolition Act has to be filed within 30 days but in the present case the appeal was filed after a period of 28 years. He would further submit that in the impugned order passed by the Joint Collector the observations that the subject lands in question fall within the tank bed lands area/FTL of Saroornagar Tank is without proper survey and no notice was issued to the petitioners. Learned counsel further submits that the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in CRP. No.1343 of 1966 dated 18.12.1967 and in W.P. No.4212 of 1979 are binding on all the parties including all the respondents and more particularly respondent No.4, who had passed the impugned orders after a period of 28 years after the Hon'ble Court order, dated 29.01.1980. He relied upon the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District and another v. D. NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 11 Narsinga Rao and others1 and also judgment passed by this Court in Smt.P. Mangamma and others v. the Women's Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Barakatpura, Hyderabad2 and others in support of his case.
15. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the petitioners did not derive any right on the subject property and further submits that as per the provisions of A.P. (TA) Abolition of Inam Act, 1955, subject lands must be under personal cultivation of either Inamdars or protected tenants as on the date of vesting i.e. 01.11.1973. However, on the said date neither the Inamdars or protected tenants were in cultivations and the subject lands were under submergence in Saroornagar Tank and there is no chance for cultivation at any given time. Learned Standing Counsel for GHMC also adopts the similar argument.
1 (2015) 3 Supreme Court Cases 695 2 1995 (3) ALT 330 (S.B.) NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 12
16. On perusal of the impugned order bearing Case No.F1/173/2004 dated 10.01.2008 would reveal that it is an appeal filed by respondent No.6 i.e. Deputy Collector and Mandal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar Mandal, under Section 24 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Inams Abolition Act, aggrieved by the orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy, East Division in Case No.E/267/78 dated 30.05.1980 in respect of the land bearing Sy.Nos.263 to 271, 274, 290 to 303 admeasuring Ac.48-38 gts., situated at Karmanghat village, Saroornagar mandal, Ranga Reddy district. The Appellants therein filed a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act along with affidavit explaining the delay in preferring the appeal and filed another petition under Section 151 of CPC praying to suspend the order passed by the Lower Court in Case No.E/267/78 dated 30.05.1980, which is the subject matter of this Writ Petition. The Joint Collector while referring to the brief NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 13 facts noted that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy East Division has granted Occupancy Rights"
Certificate vide E/267/78 dated 30.05.1980 to the extent of Acs.93-26 gts out of which Acs.48-38 gts., comes under Submerged area of Saroornagar Tank of Karmanghat village, Saroornagar Mandal. The details of the submerged land & Occupancy Rights Certificates are mentioned in the said impugned order. The relevant portion of the said impugned order reads as under is extracted for reference:
"The above said land falls within the full tank level of Saroornagar tank as such they have not been cultivating as on the date of vesting for grants of Occupancy Rights i.e, 1.11.1973 for grant of Occupancy Rights Certificate under the provisions of A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act 1955. Sri Moinuddin Hussain & others and Bikshapathi Reddy have obtained occupancy rights certificate vide E/267/78 dated 30.5.1980 which is contrary to the provisions of A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 as held by the Hon'ble High Court in WA No.600/87 dated 27.4.1993. In view of the above order in WA 600/87 and to protect the interest of the Covernment the Occupancy Rights Certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer East in File No.E/267/78 dated 30.5.1980 may be cancelled. Moreover it is clearly stated under Sec.3 of 2 (b) that on rights, titles and interest vesting in the Inamdar, Kabiz-e-Kadim, permanent tenant, protect tenant and non- protected tenant in respect of the Inam land, other than the interests expressly sanctioned by on under provision of this Act and including those in all communal lands, cultivated and uncultivated lands, waste lands, Pasture lands, Forest lands, Mines rivers and streams, tanks and irrigation works fisheries and Terries shall cease and NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 14 vested absolutely in the state free from all encumbrances. In view of the above observation, to protect the tank bed area, the occupancy rights certificate issued in File No.E/267/78 dated 30.5.1980 must be cancelled. Section 4 (1) 9 of A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inam 1955, also clearly states that every Inamdar shall, with effect from the date of vesting, be entitled to be registered as an occupant of all inam lands, other than lands set apart for the village community, grazing lands, mines and quarries, tanks, tank beds and irrigation works streams and rivers. In view of this provision also, the occupant rights certificate issued in E/267/78 dated 30.5.1980 may be cancelled as most of the lands mentioned in the certificate falls with in the tank bed of Saroornagar tank. On receipt of the occupation rights certificate by the respondents, they have made lands into house plots and sold to so many private individuals on notarized agreements of sale and trying to change the usage of land and this will be endanger the existence of the tank. Moreover the construction activities are banned in water body areas and making of tank bed area into house plots and constructions of houses are illegal. Hence to avoid damage to the water body i.e., Saroornagar tank and to stop illegal plotting and construction, cancellation of the occupation rights certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer (East) Hyderabad in E/267/78 dated 30.5.1980.
The case is taken on record and issued notices to both the parties. M/s.A.Narasimha Reddy, Advocates have represented the case on behalf of Respondent no.6./proposed respondents nobody has filed vakalath on behalf of respondent No.1 to 5. M/s.D.Mohan Reddy, Advocates have represented the case on behalf of proposes respondents.
Case called from time to time. Finally called on 06.11.2007. None present. Perused the material papers available on record and the court doth the following:
ORDER:
The appeal is filed by the appellant i.e. Deputy Collector & Mandal Revenue Officer Saroornagar Mandal on behalf of Government to protect the public interest in NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 15 large against the orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. R.R.East division in file No. E/267/78. dt 30-05- 1980 in respect of the land bearing Sy.Nos.263 to 271, 274, 290 to 303 admeasuring Ac. 48-38 gts situated at Karmanghat Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
The contents of the case are that, the Sub-Collector Hyderabad East vide NO.E/122/1975,dt. 24-10-1977 has allowed the claim partially and rejected the claim of inamdar and the protected tenant to register their names as occupants in respect of Sy.No. 250 to 304 situated at Karmanghat Village. Saroornagar Mandal as time barred.
Aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was preferred before the Collector R.R. District in file No.B3/626/78 wherein vide orders dt. 21-05-1980 the appellant therein (i.e. respondent no.6 in the present appeal) was held to be eligible for O.R.C. in respect of Sy.No.250 to 304 (except Sy.No.261 & 262). Aggrieved by the said order of the Collector passed in file No. B3.626/78, dt. 21-05-1980 inamdars have filed a writ petition No.4212/79 which was allowed. The Hon'ble High Court has passed order on 29-01-1980 with a direction to record the names of (6) Inamdars and protected tenant as joint pattedars in Sy.No. 250 to 304 (except Sy.No.261 &
262) of Karmanghat Village, Saroornagar Mandal in accordance to their respective shares.
In pursuance of the directions of the Hon'ble High Court, the Revenue Divisional Officer has passed orders in E/267/78, dt. 30-05-1980 that the names of the (6) Inamdars Sri. Moiuddin Hussain and others and V.Bhikshapathi, protected tenant be registered as occupants U/s 8 of the Inam abolition Act 1955 in respect of the schedule land situated at Karmanghat Village, Saroornagar Mandal as 55% i.e. 51-20 gts to inamdars and 45% i.e. 42.06 acres to the protected tenant.
Against the said order the present appeal is filed by Deputy Collector & Mandal Revenue Officer, Saroornagar Mandal since most of the land falls with in the limits of full tank area of Saroornagar tank and under submergence of the tank water and there is no chance of cultivation NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 16 On perusal of the appeal petition and documents produced by the appellant it is found that the suit land are Inam lands. The Inams in Telangana Area have been abolished and vested in the state of the then Hyderabad w.e.f. 20.7.1955 as per the A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams act 1955 Act No.VIII of 1955. The Saroornagar Tank is existing prior to abolition of Inams act 1955 i.e., 20.7.1955. Most of the appeal schedule lands are within the Full Tank Level of Saroornagar Tank prior to 20.7.1955 and remaining lands are grazing lands, waste lands, as such the lands are excluded from the provisions of A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act 1955.
The following issues arise for consideration:
i. Whether the lands come within the FTL/Submergence of Saroornagar Tank?
ii. Not withstanding the above whether O.R.C can be granted in respect of the said lands?
iii. If so, whether Occupancy can be registered in the light of Section4 (1) (a) & relevant provisions of A.P. (T.A.) Irrigation Act?
(i)Whether the lands come within the FTL/Submergence of Saroornagar Tank?
In this regard, the Deputy Collector & Mandal Revenue Officer has furnished a report along with sketch in respect of the land under submergence of Saroornagar tank where occupancy Rights Certificates were issued. The details are as under:
Sl.No. Sy.No. Total extent Submerged area FTL area
1. 263 2-02 0-07½ 1-34½
2. 264 1-35 1-23 0-12
3. 265 1-34 0-09 1-25
4. 266 1-31 1-10 0-21
5. 267 1-37 1-37 -
6. 268 1-39 1-39 -
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 17
7. 269 2-12 1-33 0-19
8. 270 2-13 0-03 2-10
9. 271 1-39 0-01 1-38
10. 274 1-35 0-01 1-34
11. 290 4-13 0-20½ 3-32½
12. 291 1-19 1-08 0-11
13. 292 1-32 0-18½ 1-13½
14. 293 1-33 0-15½ 1-17½
15. 294 1-20 1-20 -
16. 295 2-01 2-01 -
17. 296 1-37 1-37 -
18. 297 2-00 2-00 -
19. 298 1-32 1-32 -
20. 299 1-16 1-16 -
21. 300 2-08 2-08 -
22. 301 2-04 1-28 0-16
23. 302 2-14 1-24½ 0-29½
24. 303 2-12 0-17 1-35 TOTAL 28-09½ 20-28½ From the above, it is evident that out of the extent of Ac 93-26gts for which Occupancy Rights is issued, an extent of Ac.28-09% gts is covered under submergence and Ac.15-282 gts in Full Tank Level Area of Saroornagar Tank.
(ii) Not withstanding the above whether O.R.C can be granted in respect of the said lands?
A brief discussion on the scheme of the A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 would not be out of place. The Act seeks to achieve the following objects: -
1. Abolition of all inams other than village service inams and imams held by religious and charitable institutions;
2. full assessment being charged for such abolished inams;
3. the retention by the inamdar as well as his tenants of lands under their personal cultivation to the extent of the maximum allowed under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950; and NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 18
4. giving adequate compensation for the lands resumed from them.
In consonance with these objects, Section 3 of the Act provides for abolition of all imams (subject to the exceptions contained therein) and declares that these lands shall vest in the state.
In order to safe guard the interest of Inamdars and others who are in personal cultivation of the land, the Act entitles the following categories of cultivators to be registered as occupants:
i. Inamdars (Section 4) ii. Kabiz-e-kadim (Section 5) iii. Permanent tenant (Section 6) iv. Protected tenant (Section 7) v. Non-protected tenant (Section 8)
The following pre-requisites (common to all the above 5 categories) are to be fulfilled in order to be registered as an occupant;
i) The applicant should be in possession of the land as on the crucial date of vesting i.c.1-11-1973.
ii) The land must be under his personal cultivation.
iii) The land together with any lands he separately owns and cultivates personally, are not in excess of the stipulated 'family holding".
The aforesaid categories of cultivators would be entitled to be registered as occupants only if they satisfy the conditions (apart from the above mentioned common conditions) stipulated in the respective sections of the Act.
Therefore, any application/claim for occupancy rights certificate should be strictly examined in consonance with the above scheme of the Act.
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 19 On perusal of the documents produced by the petitioner it is found that as on 1.11.73 no one is in cultivation of the suit land though their names were recorded as possessors and no extent was mentioned as cultivation in the relevant column. Therefore it is clearly evident that the land in question was not under cultivation on 1.11.73. It appears that the respondents have mis- represented the facts and played fraud and obtained the Occupancy Rights Certificate in favour of them in respect of the above submergence lands, grazing/waste lands which are excluded from the provisions of Abolition of Inams Act 1955.
iii) If so, whether Occupancy can be registered in the light of Section4 (1) (a) & relevant provisions of A.P. (T.A.) Irrigation Act ?
The relevant rule provisions are discussed as follows:
Section 47 & 48 of A.P. (T.A.) Irrigation Act 1357 read as follows:
Section 47: The patta for the bed land of tank shall not be granted nor the existing occupancy rights continued where the tank is utilized as water reservoir under a canal or channel:
Section 48: The following matters are prohibited within the boundaries of a water reservoir, tank, canal or channel except that they are performed by persons authorized:-
Section 48 (a):- removal of any material relating to the irrigation work, Section 48 (b):- cultivation of any kind Section 48 (c):- sowing or planting of trees Section 48 (d):- tapping of Abakari trees situated on the land acquired Section 48 (e):- establishment of any new place of worship; Section 48 (f):- grazing or tethering of any animal Section 48 (g):- vehicular traffic on bunds or inspection pathways;
Section 48 (h):- passage of animals on bunds or inspection pathways;
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 20 Section 48 (i):- corruption of or fouling the water. Section 48 (j):- removal or cutting of or damaging trees in any way, Section 48 (k):- other prescribed matters.
Section 3 (2) (b) of A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act 1955 read as follows:
Section 3 (2) (b): all rights, title and interest vesting in the inamdar, Kabiz-e-Kadim, permanent tenant, protected tenant and non-protected tenant in respect of the inam lands, other than the interest expressly saved by or under provisions of this Act and including those in all communal lands, cultivated and uncultivated lands (whether assessed or not), waste lands, pasture lands, forests, mines and minerals, quarries, rivers and streams, tanks and irrigation works, fisheries and ferries, shall cease and be vested absolutely in the State free from all encumbrances;
The Hon'ble Supreme Court has in Hinch Lal Tiwari V. Kamala Devi, [(2001) 6 SCC 496] that a water body/poramboke tank though fallen in disuse should always be retained as a water body/ tank and the Revenue authorities should take all necessary steps to preserve such tank. Therefore, the tanks that vest in the Panchayat or the Government, cannot be used for agricultural purpose.
The Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh has held in B. Ramender Reddy and others Vs the District Collector Hyderabad and others [1993 (2) An.W.R. 84 (D.B)] that the Inamdar /occupants are not entitled to any Occupancy Rights Certificate on the grazing lands U/s 4 of A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act 1955.
As per Section 4 (1) (a) of A.P.T.A Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 Occupancy Right Certificate cannot be issued in respect of "lands set apart for the village community grazing lands, mines and quarries, tanks, tank beds and irrigation works, streams and rivers:"
In the instant case, as the land in question falls within the submergence area of Saroornagar Tank of NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 21 Karmanghat village, Saroornagar Mandal, it falls within the prohibition of Section 4 (1) (a) mentioned above and Occupancy Rights Certificate cannot be issued in respect of the said land.
Further, the Mandal Revenue Officer has reported that on receipt of Occupancy Rights Certificate by the respondents, they have made the land into house plots and sold to many private individuals on notarized agreements of sale and trying to change the usage of land which will endanger the existence of tank. The construction activities are banned in water body areas and making tank bed area into house plots and construction of houses are illegal. Hence to avoid damage to water body i.e., Saroornagar Tank and to stop illegal plotting and construction the Occupancy Rights Certificate to the submerged extent has to be set aside.
As such, Occupancy Rights Certificate cannot be granted in respect of Sy.No.263 to 271, 274, 290 to 303 admeasuring Acs.48-38 gts situated at Kharmanghat village, Saroornagar Mandal. For the reasons explained above the impugned orders of Revenue Divisional Officer, in Proceedings. No E/267/78 dated 30-05-1980 to the above extent is here by set aside. The land in question being Inam lands vest with the State upon abolition of Inams as per Section 3 of the Act. As the lands in question fall within the tank bed area/full tank level of Saroornagar Tank, in respect of these lands occupancy cannot be registered as per Section 4(1) (a) of the Act. The lands therefore, vest with the State and Tahsildar, Saroorngar is directed to safeguard the said lands. The appeal is accordingly disposed of."
17. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner placed and relied upon the G.O.Ms.No.582 MA dated 01.12.2001, which is extracted as follows:
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 22 "GOVERNMENT OFANDHRA PRADESH ABSTRACT LB.NAGAR MUNICIPALITY-Town planning formation of Neckalace Road in Saroornagar tank, Payment of compensation-suspension of CR287 Dated 31-1-2003 of LBNagar Municipal Council-Orders. Issued. MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT (11) DEPARTMENT G.O.Ms.No. 582 ΜΑ. Dated: 1 December, 2001 Read the following:
1. From The G.P. for GAD & HMA, High Court, Lr.No.CC/609/2003Dated 4-7-2003.
2. Govt.Memo No. 24425/J1/2002-2 dated 3-7-2003
3. From the Municipal Commissioner LB Nagar Municipality Lr.No. G1/5764/95 dt. 20-8-2003
4. Govt.Memo No. 24425/J1/2002-1 dated 19-12-2003.
5. From the Chairperson LB Nagar Municipality Lr.No. G1/5764/95 dt. 24-12-2003.
6. From the Collector, RR Dist. Lr.No.G2/1222/2003 dated 26-12-2003.
7. From the Municipal Commissioner, LB Nagar Municipality Lr.No. G1/5764/95 dt. 27-12-2003.
8. From the Director of Municipal Administration AP IHyderabad. Lr. No. 23088/03/G1 Dated 29-12-2003.
9. Govt.Memo No. 24425/J1/2003-5 dated 31-12-03.
10.Govt. Lr. No. 24-425/J1/2003-6 dated 31-12-2003.
Addressed to Vice Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad.
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 23 ORDER.
The Collector & Dist. Magistrate, R.R. District/Special Officer, LB Nagar Municpality has acquired an extent of Ac.3-32 guntas for laying of necklace road in Saroornagar Tank bed area. The Collector & District Magistrate, R.R. District has informed that an amount of Rs. 37 Lakhs was spent by the Municipality on development of roads and the HUDA has taken up the scheme of Beautification of tank and development of roads. Since no compensation has been paid to the owners of the land, they have filed a writ petition No. 19632/2001 before the Hon'ble High court of AP. The Hon'ble High court in its order dated 28-10-2002 in the above WP has directed to issue Draft Notification and Draft Declaration under LA Act within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order and complete the award inquiry within three months and pay necessary compensation as per the award.
2. The writ petitioners have filed contempt case before the Hon'ble High court for not having implemented the earlier orders of the Hon'ble High court in WP No. 19632/2001 for making payment of the compensation to them.
3. The special Deputy Collector and RDO, RR East Division/Land Acquisition officer has requested the LB Nagar Municipality to deposit an amount of Approximately Rs. 3,45,13,555/- for making payment of compensation to the Land owners. The HUDA is also one of the Respondents in the writ petition and contempt case.
4. The Municipal council, LB Nagar Municipality in its council Resolution No. 287 dated 31-1-2003 has resolved that the financial position of the Municipality is weak even to pay the initially decided amount of Rs. 1,29,93,000/- and to request the Government to sanction special grant for payment on the compensation. The Municipal Commissioner, LB Nagar Municipality in his letter seventh cited has informed that the financial position of the Municipality is very weak and they are not in a position to make payment.
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 24
5. The Director of Municipal Administration, AP Hyderabad in the Reference eight read above has proposed that out of the total amount of Rs. 3,45,13,555/- which has to be paid to the land owners as compensation an amount of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-(Rupees one crore only) may be paid by the Municipality from the BRS amount available with the Municipality and the remaining amount of rs. 2,45,13,555/-(Rupees Two crores, forty five lakhs, thirteen thousand, five hundred and fifty five only) may be arranged to be paid by HUDA from the Development/betterment charges.
6. After careful examination of the proposals, Government in exercise of the powers conferred under section 59(2) of the AP Municipalities Act 1965, hereby suspend the council Resolution No. 287 Dt. 31-1-2003 with immediate effect in public interest.
7. The vice chairman, Hyderabad urban Development Authority, Hyderabad and the Municipal Commissioner LB Nagar Municipality shall take immediate necessary action to deposit an amount of Rs. 2,45,13,555/- (Rupees Two Crores, Forty Five Lakhs, Thirteen Thousand, Five hundred and Fifty five only) and Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only) respectively with the special grade Deputy Collector & RDO RR East Division/Land Acquisition officer, RR Dist. For making payment to the land owners after initiating land Acquisition proceedings and passing aware as per the land Acquisition Act, as directed in the reference with and tenth read above."
18. It is to be noted that under the G.O.Ms.No.582 MA dated 01.12.2001, as relied by learned counsel for petitioners, the subject land was acquired for development of Saroornagar Tank Bund Area, for which orders were issued. The said G.O. pertains to land to an NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 25 extent of Ac.3-22 gts., and the land in question in the present writ petition is to an extent of Ac.48-38 gts. During the proceedings before the Joint Collector, the petitioners have not presented any supporting documents to advance their submissions. Relying upon the Revenue records pertaining to their predecessors, the petitioners submitted that the respondents 10 to 15 have transferred their right and title by virtue of several documents. However, no documents were filed by the petitioners even in the present Writ Petition sourcing their right, title and interest on the subject lands. That apart some of the petitioners in the present Writ Petition were proposed respondents in Appeal before the Joint Collector and respondents 10 to 15 in the present Writ Petition are respondent Nos.1 to 6 in the appeal Case No.F1/173/2004 and are only proforma parties in this writ petition. The petitioners filed a Memo to that effect. This Court, vide order dated 24.06.2011 dismissed for NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 26 default as against respondent Nos.10 to 15 in the present Writ Petition.
19. It is observed that the Joint Collector in the Appeal order has taken the case on record and issued notices to both the parties. Though the petitioners were represented by their counsel and when the case was taken up for hearing finally on 06.11.2007 none were present. Therefore, based on the material available on the record the Joint Collector disposed the said appeal.
20. The petitioners having not contested the Appeal, cannot raise the aspect of resjudicata. In the Appeal Case, the Joint Collector has rightly applied the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi3, which is binding on all, wherein it is held that a water body / poramboke tank though fallen in disuse should always be retained as a water body / tank 3 (2001) 6 SCC 496 NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 27 and the Revenue authorities should take all necessary steps to preserve such tank.
21. In the Appeal Case, the Joint Collector considering the provisions of A.P. (T.A.) Irrigation Act, 1357 and also A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act 1955 observed that most of the lands fell within the Full Tank Level of Saroornagar Tank and was under the submergence of Tank, as such there is no chance for cultivation and the said Saroorngar Tank is existing prior to the A.P. (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act 1955 i.e., 20.07.1955 and it was also observed that as on 01.11.1973, (a crucial date for vesting to be fulfilled in order to be required as occupant) no one was in cultivation on the subject lands though their names were incorporated as possessors and no extent was mentioned as cultivation in the relevant column. The Joint Collector held that the claim for occupancy rights certificate was not in consonance with the provisions of the A.P. (TA) Abolition of Inam Act, 1955 and the Occupancy Rights NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 28 Certificate vide E/267/78 dated 30.05.1980 was contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1955. Noting down the same, the Joint Collector observed that the respondents have misrepresented the facts and played fraud and obtained Occupancy Right Certificates in their favour in respect of the above submergence lands, grazing/waste lands which are excluded from the provisions of Abolition of Inams Act 1955. It is further to be noted that as per the report of the Mandal Revenue Officer, on receipt of the Occupancy Right Certificates the respondents have converted the subject lands into plots without any authority and sold it to private individuals on notarized agreements and such sales cannot be considered as valid conveyance in the eye of law. Since the petitioners have not contested the case before the Joint Collector and the occupancy rights of the predecessors of the petitioners i.e., respondent Nos.10 to 15 were set aside to the extent on the subject property i.e., land admeasuring Ac.48.38 gts., in Sy.Nos.263 to 271, 274, 290 to 303 situated at Karmanghat village, NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 29 Saroornagar Mandal, the petitioners cannot derive any right, interest on the subject property. Relying on the same, the Joint Collector has also rightly set aside the Occupancy Rights issued to the submerged lands in the water body. Since the rights of respondents Nos.10 to 15 have been set aside and the appeal was disposed of, the claim of the petitioners is un-sustainable and the order dated 10.01.2008 warrants no interference. Therefore, this writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed. However, if a part of the petitioners' subject lands are covered as referred in G.O.Ms.No.582 MA dated 01.12.2001, and if the petitioners are still aggrieved, they may seek appropriate remedy as available under law, if they are otherwise eligible.
22. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
NVSK,J W.P.No.5455 of 2008 30 Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_________________________________ JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR Date: 01-04-2025 Note: L.R. copy be marked.
B/o.PN