IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT HYDERABAD
*HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
+W.P.No.22450 of 2010
% 9-12-2010
# Madiga Papanna s/o.late Gounda Jammanna .. Petitioner
Vs.
$ State of Andhra Pradesh,
represented by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad
and others .. Respondents
! Counsel for petitioner : Sri Vedula Srinivas
^ Counsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.
Between :
Madiga Papanna s/o.late Gounda Jammanna .. Petitioner
And
State of Andhra Pradesh,
represented by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad
and others .. Respondents
Counsel for petitioner : Sri Vedula Srinivas
Counsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.
The Court made the following :
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in including land in Sy.No.174 of Dinne Devarapadu village, Kurnool Mandal and District, in the list of prohibited lands under the provisions of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act 1977 and consequently the action of respondent No.4 in not registering the documents sought to be presented by the petitioner for registration as illegal and arbitrary.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.
The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1-78 cents in Sy.No.174 of the above mentioned village. In support of his claim that he is the owner of the property, the petitioner has filed pattadar pass book and title deeds apart from the extract of record of holding purportedly maintained under B.S.O.No.31. When the petitioner sought to present a sale deed for registration in respect of the above mentioned land, the same was not entertained on the ground that in the list of prohibited lands communicated by respondent Nos.2 and 3 to respondent No.4, the entire land of Ac.10-72 cents in Sy.No.174 was shown as assigned land.
A counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.3 wherein it is inter alia admitted that pattadar pass book and title deed were issued in favour of the petitioner. It is further averred that the petitioner has obtained the same by misleading the revenue authorities. Respondent No.3 has maintained that the land in Sy.No.174 is classified as ‘Government AW' in Re-settlement Register (R.S.R.) of 1908 and the pattadar column was kept blank with dots. Except stating that the R.S.R. has described the land as ‘Government AW', no other revenue record has been referred to in the counter affidavit nor has been produced by the respondents at the time of hearing.
On many occasions, this Court had considered the effect of entry in the R.S.R. In a recent Judgment, which was rendered on the basis of the previous Judgments, in W.P.No.6016/2010, dated 2-7-2010, this Court has held as under :
“In the present case, except for stating that entries in the Village Account R.S.R. of Doddipalli Village indicate the lands in Survey No.1969/2, 1972, 1969/1B and 1971 as Government lands, there is no other basis for the revenue authorities to stake a claim over the lands. To the contrary, the evidence on record, being registered transactions dating back to 1942, 1938, 1959 and 1972, as the case may be, clearly negates the unilateral claim of the revenue authorities that this land is Government land. It is of course for the Government to assert and prove its title if it chooses to do so, in a properly constituted proceeding before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. Without doing so, it is not open to the revenue authorities or the registration authorities to deny persons claiming rights over such land on the basis of mere revenue entries. The action of the respondents in treating the subject land as Government land and the action of the registration authorities in refusing to receive and register documents in respect of this land is therefore unsustainable in law.”
The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that since there is a dispute regarding title, the petitioner will have to get his title declared by approaching the competent civil court.
I am afraid, I cannot accept this contention. In view of the settled legal position that mere entry in R.S.R. will not constitute proof of title and in the absence of any other revenue record showing the land as Government land, it cannot be said that there is a dispute regarding title. At any rate, mere registration of a conveyance deed does not create title in the transferee. If the Government feels that the property belongs to it, it can always avail appropriate remedy to assert its title and claim the property. Mere registration of the sale deed would not come in the way of the Government in asserting its right and availing appropriate remedy.
For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed. Respondent No.4 is directed to entertain the sale deed that may be presented by the petitioner and register the same in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
____________________
C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy.,J
Date : 9-12-2010
L.R. copies to be marked
AM
No comments:
Post a Comment