Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Duggirala Ayyanna, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 21 October, 2020
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No. 16656 2020
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents to assign the land classified as road (clay road) situated in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated at Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District as house sites under "Navaratnalu Pedalandariki Illu" scheme as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to assign the road and Bodhi (water channel) land situated in the above mentioned survey numbers as house sites.
The petitioners herein are all agriculturists depending on agriculture, having agricultural lands in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, in different survey numbers in Sy.Nos.413, 414, 417, 418, 420, 421 and 423. It is submitted that there is existing clay road in Sy.Nos. 415, 416-1, 424-1 etc., between the lands of the petitioners and the same is being used by the petitioners and other agriculturists for the purpose transporting the agricultural produce by means of tractors, bullock carts and various types of vehicles used for agricultural operations. The petitioners have been using the above road for the last several decades for the above purpose. In the revenue records also, the above said land is classified as 'road'. Similarly, there is bodhe (water channel) in Sy.No.416-2 and 424-2 of Kodangi Village and the petitioner and other ryoths are irrigating the land with the water drain from the bodhe.
MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 2 While so, Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and their subordinates have measured the land which is classified as 'road' in the revenue records in order to convert the same as house sites with a view to assign the same to the weaker sections under "Navaratnalu Pedalandariki Illu" scheme. It is further submitted that, Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and their subordinates came to the land which is being used as road has marked the land for allotment of the same as house sites in the last week of August, 2020. The land which forms part of water channel (bodhi) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 is also sought to be assigned as house sites which is totally prohibited under law. If the water channel (bodhi) is allotted as house sites, the petitioners would suffer in drawing water to their fields for agricultural operations. Though the petitioners have objected the same, the authorities did not consider oral objections of the petitioners and have been proceeding to allot the lands which are being used as road to conduct agricultural operations.
It is contended that the petitioners are having agricultural lands on both sides of the road which is going to be allotted as house sites under "Navaratnalu Scheme" and the respondents are not entitled to assign the land which is classified as 'road' and 'bodhi' (water channel). Further, the petitioners field adangals and 1-B registers to show that the revenue records would clearly disclose the survey numbers in which house sites are proposed to be allotted is meant for road. Hence, the action of the respondents proposing to assign the land as house sites which is classified as 'road' and 'bodhi' (water channel) is illegal and arbitrary.
It is the specific contention of the petitioners that the government has no right to change the nature of land from 'road' to MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 3 any other purpose and further a natural stream is passing through this land. The F.M.B copies of the above survey numbers clearly discloses about the classification of the land in the survey numbers as 'road. The very purpose of the respondents intending to change the classification of lands in the survey number is to issue house site pattas. Therefore, in case the respondents are allowed to assign the lands to landless poor by issuing D-Form pattas, the petitioners would be deprived of their amenity of road and drawing of water from the water channel and if, flow of water is obstructed, the lands of these petitioners and others will be inundated with water during rainy season.
Further, it is contended that there is a clear prohibition to assign such land under B.S.O 15(2). According to it, the extent of land preserved by the government like bunds, etc, can be re- classified to certain extent. When a road runs through the land applied for assignment, a width of at least one chain should be set apart for the road and the remainder dealt with under the rules. Similarly, when the bank of an irrigation work runs through or near the land, the extent of land required to allow a margin of one chain along the foot of the embankments should be set apart if the irrigation work is an important one such as a main canal, a main distributory or a main drainage, channel. one chain is equal to 100 links or equal to 66' (sixty six feet), as such the B.S.O 15(2) imposes a prohibition of assignment for a width of 66' from the bank of channel. But, without adhering to the said prohibition, the respondents intended to assign the land to house sites by reducing the width of the road as well as drainage canal, which is illegal.
MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 4 It is contended that the natural stream and road i.e. drainage canal and road in the said survey numbers is in existence since time immemorial. The petitioners being the owners of agricultural lands adjacent to the said road and canal in various ssurvey numbers mentioned above have right to claim access to the said road and the rain water will flow into the said land. As such, the action of the respondents in proposing to not to assign the road (clay lands) in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, towards "Navaratnalu - Pedalandariki Illu"
and proposing to change the classification of the land from classification of 'Road to government assessed waste is illegal and arbitrary and requested this Court to declare the same as illegal and arbitrary and issue a direction not to assign the road (clay lands) in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District.
The respondents did not file any counter, but placed on record the written instructions Roc.No.981/2019 dated 25.09.2020, contending that the petitioners are agriculturists and having agriculture lands in different survey numbers i.e. R.S.Nos.413, 414, 417, 418, 420, 421 and 423. The petitioners families are doing aquaculture in large scale measuring Ac.84-00, out of which Ac.66-00 is covered by nearly 5 tanks which are adjoining the proposed lands. The proposed fields are having width of 197 links to 257 links and a clay road is existing with a width of 32 links. After leaving a margin of 15 links on each side i.e., 62 links, the vacant land has been proposed for house sites. The clay road does not lead MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 5 to any other village. Further, it is not being utilized for transporting the agricultural produce and also not being utilized for agricultural operations as alleged. It is also submitted that there is no agricultural land in the village and the entire lands in the village is covered by aquaculture. Further, the fifth petitioner has encroached and raised three sheds in R.S.No.390 which is classified as L.F. Road and situated in continuation of proposed survey numbers. It is further submitted that the land proposed is not classified as water body and change of classification for the vacant land in L.F. Road classification has only been proposed for allocation of pattas to the houseless poor in the village and the clay road does not lead to any other village and existing clay road as well as proper margins i.e. a width of 62 links and 2 bodhies with a width of 20 links have been left on ground while proposing the vacant land for house sites. It is also submitted that, change of classification of land of an extent of Ac.2-22 cts out of Ac.5-42 cts in R.S.Nos.415,416-1 and 424-1 has been made after due publication of A-1 notice and Gram Panchayat Resolution and the petitioner have not raised any objections at any point of time and the petitioners with a malafide intention of encroaching the proposed land as it is adjoining their fish tanks have filed the present writ petition.
During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners Sri K. Venaktesh reiterated the contentions urged in the writ petition, while drawing the attention of this Court to the adangal copies, more particularly, to establish the classification of the land in above survey numbers and the land in possession and enjoyment of the land of these petitioners, so also, the water channel is in part of survey number, road in the middle of the land by producing the F.M.B. On MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 6 the strength of these documents, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the land classified as road (clay road) situated in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, cannot be converted into A.W.D to assign the same to the landless poor persons, depriving the petitioners from facility of passage and requested to issue a direction as prayed for.
Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignments contended that, when the width of the road is 197 links to 257 links and a clay road is existing with width of 32 links, after leaving a merging of 15 links on each side i.e. 62 links width of the vacant land has been proposed for house sites and the clay road does not lead to any other village. Therefore, the petitioners being the agriculturists, cannot be permitted to encroach the lands for their use when it is classified as government land and requested to dismiss the writ petition.
There is no dispute with regard to possession of the land by these petitioners and the same is supported by Form-1B produced along with the writ petition. Even the respondents also did not deny either possessing land by these petitioners or classification of land as "Road" and existence of water channel as per the revenue records..
In addition to the admission as to the classification of the land, the copy of F.M.B discloses that there is a water channel, so also road in the middle of the land. But, the width of the main road is not disclosed in the petition or in the instructions placed on record. However, the respondents in their written instructions stated that there is sufficient road margin with width of the road is 197 links to 257 links and the balance is proposed for house sites.
MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 7 In any view of the matter, B.S.O 15(4) deals with the lands that may be assigned and that may not be assigned and the same is extracted hereunder for better appreciation of the case:
"BSO 15(4) Lands that may be assigned and that may not be assigned: -
(i) All lands at the disposal of the Government except those hereinafter prohibited may be assigned. The assignment of lands shall generally be free of market value except in the case of project affected lands in which case market value shall be collected.
(ii) The assignment of the following classes of lands is prohibited:
(a) Poramboke (tank beds, foreshore of tank bed cattle stands, grazing lands and reserved lands (reserved for depressed class members or for any public purpose, such as schools, playgrounds, hospitals, maternity centers, reading rooms and extension of house-sites, Panchayat purposes, town sites and lands in the proximity thereof.
(b) Land which has been occupied for 18 months and adjoins a reserve forest or an unreserved block of a square mile or more until the Collector has consulted the District Forest Officer and considered any objections, he may have to its assignment;
(c) Lands containing topes or valuable trees;
(d) Lands within cantonment limits;
(e) Lands reserved under Section 26 of the Forest Act;
(f) Lands within port limits;
(g) Lands near the sea coast within one furlong of high water mark of the sea;
(h) Water course porambokes, namely, margins of channels, streams etc.;
(i) Lands in the vicinity of aerodromes or landing grounds (i.e.) within a belt of 200 yards;
(j) Lands containing minerals, quarries, etc.
(k) Padugais i.e. land within the flood bank of rivers, lanka lands not held on ryotwari tenure, river accretions and reformed lands for which the owners have ceased to pay assessment;
(l) Lands where "pati matti" is available and;
MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 8
(m) Any other lands which are required or likely to be required for any public or any special purposes necessary for the provision of amenities of the community or connected with the development of the village.
Provided, however, that tank bed lands, foreshore lands and lands under categories (g), (j), (k) and (m) above, if not immediately required or if their occupation be not objectionable at present, may be leased with a condition for resumption, when required for public purpose without payment of compensation for improvements, if any effected."
In view of B.S.O 15(4)(ii)(m), any other lands which are required or likely to be required for any public or any special purposes necessary for the provision of amenities of the community or connected with the development of the village, provided, however, that tank bed lands, foreshore lands and lands under categories (g),
(j), (k) and (m) above, if not immediately required or if their occupation be not objectionable at present, may be leased with a condition for resumption, when required for public purpose without payment of compensation for improvements, if any effected. Thus, from B.S.O 15(4)(ii)(m), land which is required for the provision of amenities to the community cannot be assigned. Customary easement, as provided under Section 18 of the Easements Act is an amenity to the land owned and possessed by the farmers within the vicinity, since the same is being used as road and to natural flow of excess water in water channel.
From the road, an extent of one chain on either side has to be left, one chain is equivalent to 66 feet and according to the instructions, road margin is about width of the road is 197 links to 257 links on either side. In such case, the remaining part of the land in above survey numbers with variation of margins cannot be assigned. A close look at the F.M.B produced before this Court, the MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 9 road margin is uneven and major part of the southern portion of the survey number is totally covered by water. Even otherwise, necessary margins have to be left.
As per B.S.O 15(2) the extent of land preserved by the government like bunds, etc, can be re-classified to certain extent. When a road runs through the land applied for assignment, a width of at least one chain should be set apart for the road and the remainder can be dealt with as per the rules. Similarly, when the bank of an irrigation work runs through or near the land, the extent of land required to allow a margin of one chain along the foot of the embankments should be set apart if the irrigation work is an important one such as a main canal, a main distributory or a main drainage, channel. In the case of subordinate or minor distributaries or minor drains, a margin of 30 links will be sufficient. Detailed lists of both the classes of work above referred to will be furnished by the Public Works Department. But, if in any case the irrigation work concerned is not found in either list, a margin of one chain should be set apart or reference made to the Executive Engineer, in the case of channels without embankments, however, it will suffice to set apart a margin of 15 links. If stream runs through or near the land, a margin of not less than 50 links on either bank should as a general rule be reserved and registered as poramboke. Land set apart as above should be shown in the accounts as road, tank, channel or stream or poramboke, as the case may be. It is pertinent to note that, one `chain is equal to 100 links or equal to 66' (sixty six feet), as such the B.S.O 15(2) imposes a prohibition of assignment for a width of 66' from the bank of channel. If, the mandate under B.S.O 15(4) is MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 10 followed, the portion of land in the survey numbers mentioned above cannot be assigned.
Coming to the other part of the land, the margins are uneven and at some parts, the margin is minimum and at other part, the margin is more. If, one chain on either side is required to be left, as per B.S.O 15(2), the question of assigning the land to the landless poor at different parts of the survey number is impossible. Therefore, proposing to assign the land without leaving the margins as per B.S.O 15(2) is an illegality.
According to Section 53 of The A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short 'Panchayat Raj Act'), all public roads in any village, other than National Highways, State Highways and roads vesting in Zilla Parishad or Mandal Parishad shall vest in the gram panchayat together with all pavements, stones and other materials thereof, all works, materials and other things provided therefore, all sewers, drains, drainage works, tunnels and culverts, whether made at the cost of the gram panchayat fund or otherwise, in along side or under such roads, and all works, materials and things appertaining thereto. Therefore, drainage poramboke, sewer, canal poramboke and road poramboke are deemed to have been vested on the gram panchayat and the gram panchayat will have control over those properties, since the public roads are public properties and they are constructed for the public purpose.
Thus, as per Section 53 of the Panchayat Raj Act, all public roads in any village, other than National Highways and State Highways vest in gram panchayat for the purpose of maintenance. If any immovable property for the purpose of maintenance or for achieving any of the public purpose is required, Gram Panchayat has MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 11 to - through appropriate Revenue Authority, acquire the land following the procedure under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. (vide G. Venkata Reddy v. E.O, G.P. Kollapur Village and Mandal and Post1). Thus, it is clear from the law declared by the Court that, when the property is deemed to have been vested, it is for the purpose of maintenance and even if the panchayat wants to take over the property, except by due process of acquiring the property, i.e. by acquiring the property through revenue department, they cannot take the property by claiming ownership.
Similarly, according to Section 55 of the Panchayat Raj, communal property is also deemed to have been vested in the panchayat and the income derived there from can be utilized by the gram panchayat for the benefit of the villagers in common or the holders in common of village land generally or of lands of a particular description or of lands under a particular source of irrigation, shall vest in the gram panchayat and be administered by it for the benefit of the villagers or holders.
Section 56 of the Panchayat Raj Act obligates the gram panchayat to maintain irrigation works, execution of kudimaramat etc. Section 57 of Panchayat Raj Act deals with vesting of the management of ferries in gram panchayat and according to it, Notwithstanding anything in the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Canals and Public Ferries Act, 1890 (Act 2 of 1890) and the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Ferries Act, 1314 Fasli (Act 2 of 1314 F), the management of a public ferry in the Andhra Area, and of a Government ferry in the Telangana area other than a ferry mentioned in sub-section (2) shall vest -
1 2010 (4) ALD 374 MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 12
(a) in the case of a ferry connecting any public road under the management of a gram panchayat and lying wholly within the jurisdiction of that Gram Panchayat, in such Gram Panchayat and in the case of a ferry connecting any public road under the management of a Gram Panchayat and lying within the jurisdiction of more than one Gram Panchayat, in a joint committee of the Gram Panchayats concerned;
(b) in case of a ferry connecting any public road under the management of a Mandal Parishad and lying wholly within the jurisdiction of that Mandal Parishad, in such Mandal Parishad and in the case of ferry connecting any public road under the management of a Mandal Parishad and lying within the jurisdiction of more than one Mandal Parishad, in a joint committee of the Mandal Parishads concerned;
(c) in the case of a ferry connecting any public road under the management of a Gram Panchayat or a Mandal Parishad and lying partly within the jurisdiction of a municipality, in a joint committee of the Gram Panchayat or a Mandal Parishad as the case may be, and the Municipality concerned.
(2) The Government may, subject to such conditions as may be agreed upon transfer the management of any such ferry connecting a National Highway or a State Highway and lying wholly within the jurisdiction of a Gram Panchayat or a Mandal Parishad to such Gram Panchayat or Mandal Parishad and in case the said ferry is lying within the jurisdiction of more than one Gram Panchayat or Mandal Parishad, to the Zilla Parishad concerned.
(3) The constitution and powers of the procedure to be adopted by any joint committee referred to in sub-section (1) and the method of resolving any difference of opinion arising between the local authorities concerned in connection with the works of such committee shall be in accordance with such rules as may be prescribed.
MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 13 (4) The income realised by a Zilla Parishad, Mandal Parishad or a Gram Panchayat from any ferry under its management under sub- section (1) or sub-section (2) shall form part of its funds. The income realized by joint committee referred to in sub-section (1) or by a Zilla Parishad under subsection (2) from a ferry under its management shall be apportioned in equal shares between the local authorities concerned and the amount so apportioned shall form part of the funds of such local authorities.
Section 58 of the Panchayat Raj Act is a special provision to divest the tanks, roads, etc, specified in Sections 53, 54, 55 & 57, including the porambokes namely, grazing grounds, thrashing floors, burning and burial grounds, cattle stands, cart tracks and topes, which are at the disposal of the Government and are not required by them for any specific purpose shall vest in the Gram Panchayat subject to such restrictions and control as may be prescribed. Sub-section (2) of Section 58 says that, the Government may, at any time by notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, direct that any porambokes referred to in sub-section (1) shall cease to vest in the Gram Panchayat if it is required by them for any specific purpose and thereupon such porambokes shall vest in the Government. Therefore, a gazette notification is necessary to divest the property on the government that vested on the gram panchayat. In the absence of any notification issued by the Government divesting Gram Panchayats of any poramboke lands, there cannot be any use of panchayat land by following B.S.O 15(2), the same cannot be assigned to the landless poor for house sites or otherwise. Thus, unless there is a notification by the Government divesting gram panchayat and vesting on Government any property referred above, MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 14 there cannot be any use of panchayat land for any other purpose. (vide Rythu Seva Sangam, Yenamadurru v. Bhimavaram Municipality2 and Banne Gandhi and others v. District Collector3).
A similar issue like distribution of gramakantam land which is community land to the landless poor came up for consideration in Sarpanch Palakda Gram Panchayat v. District Collector4, where the High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that distribution or assignment of gramakantham which is community land to anyone by Government without issuing any notification, divesting such land from Panchayat is illegal.
By applying these principles to the present facts of the case, the proposed assignment without divesting the land on the Government that vested on the gram panchayat by virtue of the provisions referred above is a serious illegality. Therefore, the proposed assignment of land in road (clay road) situated in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, for house sites to the Weaker Sections that vested on the gram panchayat without de-notifying by issuing gazette notification, as mandated under Section 58(2) of the Panchayat Raj Act is a serious illegality, which vitiates the entire procedure. In the present facts of the case, no procedure prescribed under Section 58(2) of Panchayat Raj Act is followed. On this ground alone, the action of the action of respondents in taking steps to assign the lands i.e. road (clay road) situated in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 2 2012 (5) ALT 631 3 2007 (2) ALT 550 4 1997 (2) ALT 486 MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 15 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, towards "Navaratnalu Pedalandariki Illu" for house sites to the Weaker Sections, is liable to be set-aside.
When the government wanted to introduce certain policy for the benefit of the poor of the State, the State is bound to follow G.O.Ms.No.510 Revenue (Lands-1) Department dated 30.12.2019 and the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Board Standing Orders.
While implementing such schemes, the State has to keep in mind the good governance, the word governance is defined as "the exercise of political, economic and administrative authority in the management of a country‟s affairs at all levels. Governance comprises the mechanisms, processes and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their political rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences. Therefore, participation in administration by both men and women is the key cornerstone of good governance. Participation may be direct or indirect. Good Governance requires fair legal frameworks that are enforced impartially. It also requires protection of human rights, independent and imperial police force, and bureaucracy. It means that information is freely available and directly accessible to those who will be affected by such decisions and their enforcement, maintaining utmost transparency. Responsiveness is also part of Good Governance and while implementing such schemes, there must be a good response to the queries of the public at large and maintain equality, inclusiveness and efficiency while fixing accountability to the concerned officials who are directly or indirectly connected with the process of implementation of such schemes. But, in the present facts of the case, though the State is conscious about the G.Os MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 16 issued by it and B.S.Os, in utmost haste, started assigning the land to various persons though such assignment is impermissible under law. Therefore, the actions of the state do not satisfy the requirement of good governance.
Good Governance as a democratic exigency, in order to rid corruption, provides rights, the means, and the capacity to participate in the decisions that affect their lives and to hold their governments accountable for what they do, since the basic features or elements of good governance, it is participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision-making. It is also responsible to the present and fixture needs of the society.
Coming to the facts of the present case, with reference to good governance, the State in haphazard manner framed certain guidelines for providing house sites to landless poor within a time frame, without prior identification of the land, proposed to be assigned. But, in utmost hurry, the officials at different levels identifying the land somehow to satisfy the higher-ups in the administration, irrespective of feasibility and permissibility to assign those lands, totally ignored the orders issued by the Government, more particularly, G.O.Ms.No.510 Revenue (Lands-1) Department dated 30.12.2019 and the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Board Standing Orders, including the provisions of Panchayat Raj Act. Such haste acts leads to deprivation of rights of the citizen. In fact, in G.O.Ms.No.510 Revenue (Lands-1) Department dated 30.12.2019 MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 17 itself, the Government authorized the District Collectors not to propose any lands belongs to Endowments, Educational Institutions, Wakf or any other religious related lands, environmentally sensitive and fragile areas such as, tank beds, river beds, other water bodies and hillocks with afforestation etc., for house site purposes.
In view of B.S.O 15(4)(h,m), water bodies, any other lands which are required or likely to be required for any public or any special purposes necessary for the provision of amenities of the community or connected with the development of the village, provided, however, that tank bed lands, foreshore lands and lands under categories (g), (j), (k) and (m) above, if not immediately required or if their occupation be not objectionable at present, may be leased with a condition for resumption, when required for public purpose without payment of compensation for improvements, if any effected. Thus, from B.S.O 15(4)(m), land which is required for the provision of amenities to the community cannot be assigned. Therefore, the amenities provided to the farmers and citizens of the State cannot be taken away by assigning the lands to the landless poor in the schemes of the State in the name of providing house sites to the landless poor, since conferring right to one sect of people, depriving the others is not good governance.
Even according to the proviso to B.S.O 15(4) thereto, if such land is covered by Clauses (g), (j), (k) and (m), if not immediately required or if their occupation be not objectionable at present, may be leased with a condition for resumption, when required for any public purpose without payment of compensation for improvements, if any affected. Therefore, such land preserved cannot be assigned, except ek sal lease. But, the same cannot be converted by exercising MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 18 power under B.S.O 15(2). In those circumstances, the proposal to assign the lands i.e. road (clay road) situated in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, is a grave illegality.
Hence, the proposal of the respondents to assign the land mentioned in the written instructions, to the landless poor without adhering to B.S.O 15 and the judgment of Apex Court Intellectual Forum, Tirupati v. State of Andhra Pradesh5 and the mandatory procedure under A.P. Panchayat Raj Act is illegal.
In the result, writ petition is allowed, declaring the action of the respondents in proposing to assign house site plots in the land i.e. road (clay road) situated in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc, and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, without adhering to the guidelines issued by the State in G.O.Ms.No.510 Revenue (Lands-1) Department dated 30.12.2019 and B.S.O 15(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Board Standing Orders and proviso thereto, so also, Sections 53 and 58 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act as illegal and arbitrary. Consequently, the respondents are directed not to assign the lands without following the mandatory procedure.
However, liberty is given to the State to take steps for assignment, identifying the land situated in Sy.Nos.415, 416-1, 424-1 etc i.e. road (clay road), and Bodhi (water channel) situated in Sy.Nos.416-2 and 424-2 situated in Kondangi Village, Kalidindi Mandal, Krishna District, strictly adhering to G.O.Ms.No.510 Revenue (Lands-1) Department dated 30.12.2019 and B.S.O 15(4) of 5 AIR 2006 SC 1350 MSM,J WP No.16656 of 2020 19 the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Board Standing Orders and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Intellectual Forum, Tirupati v. State of Andhra Pradesh (referred supra) and Sections 53 and 58 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, in the presence of the petitioners, after serving notice in writing, affixing the date and time for such identification and proceed further, in accordance with law.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand dismissed.
__________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date:21.10.2020 SP