LAWS(MAD)-2018-10-286

M E MARI Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

Decided On October 10, 2018
M E Mari Appellant
V/S
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of rejection issued by the first respondent Government in respect of the claim of the writ petitioners to assign the land under their possession and enjoyment in G.O.(Nilai) No.44, Revenue (Ni.Mu.3(2)) Department dated 12.02.2013 is under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The learned counsel for the writ petitioners made a submission that the first petitioner is the elder brother of the second petitioner and they are cultivating the land which is under their possession and enjoyment. The petitioners belong to schedule caste community and they are of landless poor family. The petitioners hail from Madurantakam and permanently reside at Melakandai Village in the Madurantakam Taluk. The petitioners are cultivating and doing agricultural work in a piece of land measuring 43 Hectares (6.00 Acres) of land of G.G.P classified Punja Poramboke Land in S.No.52 of the Melkandai Village from 1970 on wards. In the Jamapandy held in the year 1974 by the Government, the Revenue Divisional Officer in his proceedings K.Dis.Pr.932/74, dated 20.05.1974 granted temporary permission to the writ petitioners to enter upon the said land and do the agricultural activities. It is contented that the petitioners have improved the said land by digging a big well for cultivation and the crops were cultivated every year by utilizing the water from the said well.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners made a submission that undoubtedly the land is classified as Punja Poramboke and grazing land. However the temporary permission was granted to the writ petitioners to do agricultural activities in the said land measuring about 6 acres and they are continuing their agricultural activities even today. The petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the said land right from the year 1974 and therefore, they are entitled for assignment as per the standing orders of the Revenue Department. The standing order provides that such grazing lands shall be assigned in favour of poor landless people for their livelihood. Thus the benefit of the said standing order is to be extended by assigning the said land. In respect of the impugned order of rejection issued in G.O.(Nilai) No.44, Revenue (Ni.Mu.3(2)) Department dated 12.02.2013, the first respondent had not considered the standing order and other relevant factors raised by the writ petitioners in their application. At the outset, it is contended that the writ petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the said land of 6 acres for long years are doing agricultural activities. This apart the writ petitioners are of the landless poor family and therefore they are entitled for assignment. It is further contented that the first respondent Government had not considered the ground raised by the writ petitioners with reference to the standing orders of the Revenue Department. In support of the said contentions, the learned counsel referred the judgment of the Larger Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Land Acquisition Officer cum R.D.O. and Others Vs. Mekala Pandu and Others reported in, (2004) 3 CTC 19, wherein the Larger Bench held that the entire issue relating to assignment of land by the Government to the landless poor farmers and the weaker sections of the society is required to be considered in a proper perspective. The assignment is not a gratis but the constitutional obligation imposed upon the State. It is in the nature of public assistance. The assignees are constitutional claimants. While interpreting the provisions relating to grant of assignment of land by the Government to the vulnerable sections of the society, this Court has to bear in mind the Constitutional commands enshrined in Part IV of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel for the writ petitioners referred paragraphs 15 & 16 of the judgment, which read as under.