Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Karri Sri Rama Chandra Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 October, 2019
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAUJULU
WRIT PETITION No.17105 of 2019
O R D E R:
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in taking steps to convert the classification of the Puntha Poramboke land into Gramkantam (Village site) by addressing a letter to the 4th respondent through impugned notice vide Rc.No.2011/2019 (B) dated 04.10.2019 and by calling for objections in order to grant the Puntha Poramboke land as House sites is arbitrary, illegal and without having power or authority and accordingly set aside the impugned notice vide Rc.No.2011/2019 (B) dated 04.10.2019 and consequently direct the respondents not to change the existing classification of the Puntha Poramboke land to an extent of Ac.0- 40 cents situated in R.S.Nos.229 & 230 of Inaparru Village, Iragavaram Mandal, West Godavari District into Gramakantam (Village site) and continue the existing classification of Puntha Poramboke land which is used for the purpose of Threshing Floor and for other agricultural operations by the petitioner and other Ryots of Inparru Villagers of Iragavaram Mandal, West Godavari District.
2) This Court has heard Sri K. Muralidhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appears for 1st respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appears for respondents 2 to 4.
3) Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the Section 55 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, argues that until and unless a 2 notification is issued, the respondents cannot take any action to convert the use of the land. According to him, the land which is the subject matter of the writ petition has been used as a threshing floor by all the villagers, who are cultivating about 128 acres of land in the said village. Learned counsel submits that this is a common purpose or public purpose for which the land is being used as a threshing floor. Learned counsel also submits that the Tahsildar, who is the 2nd respondent, issued a notice stating that the Government is proposing to change the classification of the land as Gramakantam, the villagers have filed an objection, dated 17.10.2019 and marked copies of the same to all the revenue authorities. Even the Gram Panchayat has passed a resolution on 18.10.2019 wherein the panchayat also recorded that the ryots were cultivating the land in that area as has their objection. Therefore, he submitted the same to the Tahsildar office itself. Learned counsel argues that till the notification is issued by the Government in terms of Section 58(2) of the Act and it is published in a gazette, no further steps can be taken to re-classification of the land. He relies upon the judgments which are enclosed to the writ petition as material papers for his arguments.
4) In reply to this, both the learned Government Pleaders for Panchayat Raj and Revenue argued that the writ application itself is premature. They pointed out that the panchayat and villagers were put on notice and objections were invited from the public and displayed the notice in the notice board. Thereafter, the villagers have submitted their objections and the panchayat were also forwarded the same. Learned Government Pleaders also submit that no decision has not yet been taken the writ petition is also premature. Learned Government Pleaders also 3 argued that the issue of the notification is only arises after the objections are heard and disposed of. In fact they rely upon the Division Bench judgment reported in Rythu Seva Sangam, Yenamadurru, Bhimavaram Mandal, West Godavari District v. Bhimavaram Municipality, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District1 to argue the notification under Section 58(2) shall divest the Gram Panchayat of poramboke lands to vest in the State. In fact, learned Government Pleaders pointed out that the Hon'ble Division Bench held as follows:
"This is the reason whey whenever any land is sought to be used for a specific purpose or sought to be alienated to a private organization, the Gram Panchayat is always put on notice for their views".
Therefore, learned Government Pleaders argued that a notification will only be issued after the views of the Gram Panchayat and the objections of the villagers are concerned they again reiterated that the writ is therefore, premature.
5) This Court after hearing both the learned counsel is of the opinion that in view of the legal position that is relied upon by both the counsel, the objections raised by the villagers and the Gram Panchayat ought to be considered by the respondents before any further action is taken. In view of the fact that the representation or the objections of the villagers, dated 17.10.2019, are already pending before the authorities, the 2nd respondent is therefore, directed to consider and dispose of the said objections, strictly in accordance with law, without in any way being influenced by the fact that the order is passed by this Court. It is needless to say that the entire exercise should be completed within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
1 2012(5) ALD 551 (DB) 4
6) With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. In these circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________ D.V.S.S. SOMAYAYULU, J Dt.31.10.2019 PGR