Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Parvatam Satyanarayana, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 January, 2020
Author: M. Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M. Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Writ Petition No.1676 of 2020
ORDER:
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed, questioning the proceedings dated 13.01.2020, issued by fourth respondent herein/Tahsildar, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, in respect of an extent of Ac.0.50 cents out of Ac.2.93 cents in Sy.No.294/23 of Arulla village, Tadepalligudem Mandal, West Godavari District, under Section 6 of A.P Land Encroachment Act (for short the Act), declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.
2. The petitioner is the person in possession of property of an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.294/23 of Arulla village, Tadepallugudem Mandal, West Godavari District, possession of petitioner is not in dispute, because fourth respondent issued notice under Section 7 of the Act and passed order under Section 6 of the Act. According to the petitioner, land in Sy.No.294/23 is classified as gramakantam, it is under cultivation by raising paddy crop. As per notice under Section 6 of the Act, when land is classified as gramakantam, respondents have no authority to exercise power to evict the petitioner, invoking provisions of the Act, by issuing notice under Section 7 and Section 6 of the Act, requested to set aside the order passed under Section 6 of the Act.
3. Whereas learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue contended that Gram Panchayat is competent to exercise power on all public roads, poramboke etc., in terms of Section 53 of A.P 2 MSM, J wp_1676_ 2020 Panchayat Raj Act, without impleading Gram Panchayat, writ petition is not maintainable. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to G.O.Ms.No.187, dated 27.05.2015, issued by Revenue (ASSN.I) Department.
4. Undisputedly, petitioner is in possession of subject land, notice under Section 7 of the Act was issued, thereafter passed order under Section 6 of the Act. However, as per the notice issued by fourth respondent, under Section 7 of the Act, in column No.3 of schedule, the land is classified as gramakantam. Therefore, such gramakantam is deemed to have been vested on the Gram Panchayat on its constitution in terms of Section 53 of A.P Panchayat Raj Act. Even in G.O.Ms.No.187, dated 27.05.2015 issued based on orders in W.P No.553 of 2012, dated 09.07.2012 between Nagarala Nirvasithula Welfare Association v. The Government of A.P where the Court held that:
"On behalf of respondents, reliance is placed upon judgment of this Court in Banne Gandhi and others v. District Collector, R.R District1, which arose under A.P Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Section 58 (1) therefore directs that all porambokes viz., grazing grounds, threshing floors, burning and burial grounds, cattle stands, carts tanks etc., vest in the Gram Panchayat. sub-section (2) thereof directs that the Government may, at any time, by notification in the A.P Gazette, direct that any porambokes referred to in sub-section (1) shall cease to vest in the Gram Panchayat.
The Government initiated steps to issue house site pattas over the land which formed part of gramakantam. The same was challenged stating that gramakanatam vests in the Gram Panchayat and that the Government cannot grant house site pattas in it. A learned Single Judge of this Court held that there is no mention of gramakantam in 1 2007 (4) ALD 374 3 MSM, J wp_1676_ 2020 sub-section (1) and thereby, the question of such lands vesting in the Government does not arise"
5. Thus, after careful examination of matter, the Government has decided that gramakantam land vests in the Gram Panchayat, there is a need to withdraw these lands from the purview of Section 22-A of Registration Act, to remove the hardship of general public. Therefore, Government ordered that the District Collectors shall withdraw gramakantam lands from the lists of properties, prohibited from registration, furnished to the Registering Officers, under Section 22-A of Registration Act. It shall be the responsibility of Gram Panchayats to take appropriate action in respect of gramakantam land including protection of the extents of land meant for communal purpose.
6. According to G.O.Ms.No.187, dated 27.05.2015, gramakantam land is deemed to have been vested on Gram Panchayat in terms of Section 53, unless notification is issued under Section 58 (2) of A.P Panchayat Raj Act, divesting the land on Government from Gram panchayat. But no such notification was issued, till date. Hence, respondents have no jurisdiction to take steps to evict the petitioner, describing him as an encroacher by invoking provision of the Act. At best Gram Panchayat may take appropriate steps in terms of G.O.Ms.No.187, dated 27.05.2015. Hence, notice under Section 7 and Section 6 of the Act, by respondents is without jurisdiction and the same is liable to be set aside.
4 MSM, J wp_1676_ 2020
7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, setting aside the order impugned in the writ petition, dated 13.01.2020, passed under Section 6 of the Act, declaring the same as illegal and arbitrary, leaving it open to the Gram Panchayat to take appropriate steps. There shall be no costs.
8. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Dated 30.01.2020 Rvk