Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Bonam Ratnaji, Narsapuram, West ... vs Commissioner Of Endowments, Hyderabad ... on 13 November, 2024
APHC010609542011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 31469/2011
Between:
Bonam Ratnaji, Narsapuram, West Godavari Dist & ...PETITIONER(S)
Another and Others
AND
Commissioner Of Endowments Hyderabad 3 Others and ...RESPONDENT(S)
Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. T S RAYALU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
2. ELEVATED AS JUDGE The Court made the following Order:
The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:
".....to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction one more particularly in the nature of Writ Mandamus (a) Declaring the action of the Respondents in not finalizing the proposal for sale of agricultural land of an extent of Ac.2.75 Cts each in favour of the Petitioners situated at Madhavayapalem, Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District, as per the recommendation of the 4th Respondent Institution, Dt.31.12.2010 and in terms of Secion 82(2) of Act 30 of 1987
(b) And consequentially direct the respondents to consider the 2 representation of the petitioners Dt.09.08.2010 for sale of agricultural land of an extent of Ac.2.75 Cts each in favour of the Petitioners situated at Madhavayapalem, Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District as per the recommendation of the 4th Respondent Institution, Dt.31.12.2010 and in terms of Section 82(2) of Act 30 of 1987 at the earliest prefere within the period of 4 weeks......."
2. Brief facts of the case are that the 1st petitioner is in occupation of Ac.2.75 cents as a lessee situated in Madhavaipalem Village, Narsapuram town and Mandal, West Godavari district belonging to the 4th respondent and he was recognized as Land Less Poor by the competent authority vide Proceedings No.A2/2148/08, dated 04.07.2008. Likewise, the 2 nd petitioner is in occupation of Ac.2.75 cents in another extent and he hwas recognized as Land Less Poor by the competent authority vide Rc.No.A2/2148/08, dated 04.07.2008. After the petitioners have been declared as Land Less Poor under provisions contained in Section 82 of Act 30 of 1988, the petitioners approached the respondents to purchase the lands in their occupation at 75% of market value as provided under Section 82(2) of the Act vide representation dated 09.08.2010 made to the Institution and the authorities. The 4th respondent in pursuance of the instructions given by the 2nd and 3rd respondents, submitted a letter vide No.94/2010, dated 31.12.2010 informing that the petitioners are cultivating tenants of an extent of Ac.2.75 cents each situated in Survey Nos.145 and 146 of Madhavaipalem Village, Narsapuram Town and Mandal, West Godavari district and that they are not in arrears of any rent, as per the basic value certificate of the Sub-Registry, the prevailing 3 value is about 6 lakhs per acre and the market value is between 12 to 15 lakhs per acre. The 4th respondent recommended the proposals for sale of lands to the petitioners. But till date, the respondents have not taken any steps to finalize the said sale proposals. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. The 3rd respondent filed counter affidavit denying all the allegations made in the writ petition. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioners herein have approached the public authority vide on 11/08/2010, the public authority have forwarded the representation of the petitioners to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, (Revenue) Endowments-IV Department, Hyderabad. Basing on the representation the Government vide Memo.No.38303/Endts.IV(2)/2010-1, dt:18/08/2010 has forwarded the copy of the letter of the petitioners along with the enclosures to the Commissioner, Endowments Department to furnish report. The Commissioner, Endowments Department vide proceedings in Rc.No.LL2/41155/2010, dt:18/09/2010 has forwarded the same to the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, West Godavari and requested him to submit report/proposals immediately, so as to submit the same to the Government. With the request of the Commissioner, Endowments Department, the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, West Godavari vide Rc.No.A2/11987/2010/Adm, dt:10/11/2010 has instructed the Manager of the 4th respondent temple to 4 submit a detailed report along with prevailing market value, Sub-Registrar value, Certificates. As per the instructions of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, the manager of the 4th respondent temple sent a detailed report vide Lr.No.94/2010, dt:31/12/2010 along with the basic value certificate as on 06/12/2010 issued by the Sub-Registrar, Narsapur and land value certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Narsapur dt:30/12/2010. The Manager of the 4th respondent temple has sent the factual report to the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, West Godavari District as per the instructions given by him. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, has forwarded the same to the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinada, vide his proceedings in A2/11897/2010, dated 07.04.2011. Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, Kakinada, has forwarded the same to the Commissioner, Endowments Deparment vide his proceedings Rc.No.B1/4495/2011, dated 03.11.2011. In the report the Manager has never requested the Assistant Commissioner to alienate the land in favour of the petitioners herein. It is only the report sent by the 4th respondent temple and not the recommendation to sell the land to the petitioners herein. As such the contention of the petitioners herein that the Manager of the 4th respondent herein has recommended for the sale of land in his report Lr.No.94/2010, dated 31/12/2010 is concocted and created one and the petitioner is put to strict proof of the same. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
5
4. Heard Mr.J.Sunil Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr.T.S.Rayulu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.P.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments, for the respondents.
5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents urged in the writ petition, submits that, in so far as Land Less Poor persons are concerned, the Statute itself gives them a right to purchase the lands under their cultivation for a consideration of 75% of the prevailing market value of similarly situated land at the time of purchase and such consideration shall be paid in 4 equal installments in the manner prescribed. Such sale may be effect otherwise by Tender cum Public Auction for lands which do not fall within the ambit of Section of 82(2) of the Act, those lands have to be leased out or licensed or sold etc., by way of Public Auction. The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands and Rules, 2003 have come into force from 11.03.2003 wherein Rule 6 clearly provides for sale of Agricultural lands to the sitting cultivating tenant who is a land less poor person in 4 installments. Rule 7 deals with leases by public auction of other lands wherein the Land Less poor are not in cultivation or occupation. Therefore, learned counsel requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.
6. Per Contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the question of sale of land belonging to the temple would arise only if the temple 6 is willing to sell and the trust board of concerned temple passes a resolution to that effect and if it is beneficial to the temple to sell the land to the land less poor persons. After following the above procedure only the land will be sold to the land less poor persons after issuing Form-II of Rule 5 (2) framed under G.O.Ms.No.379, dated 11-3-2003 causing the land less poor person to purchase the land for 3/4th of the market value. He further submits that the lands are fertile wet lands and double cropped lands and if the lands are sold in public auction it would fetch around Rs.2.50 crores. The temple is no way interested parting with the land at present. As such, the petitioners herein cannot force the temple to sell away the lands to them under the guise of Sec.82 of Act 30/87. Further if the temple is willing to sell the lands to the landless poor persons, the temple has to issue Form-ll under Rule 5(2) of Rules framed under G.O.Ms.No.379, dt:11/03/2003, but the temple has not issued any notice under Form-II calling the petitioners herein to purchase the lands as such, they cannot contend that the 4th respondent temple is willing to sell the lands. Therefore, learned Assistant Government Pleader prays to dismiss the writ petition.
7. On considering the submissions of both the learned counsels and upon perusing the entire material on record, this Court found no merits and devoid of merits and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed.
7
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
9. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J BMS