DISTRICT COLLECTOR R R DIST Vs. K NARSIMHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A.11 these appeals are filed against the common judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 17-7-1998 made in W.P. Nos.35173, 35225 and 35496 of 1997.

(2.) The facts in nutshell for disposal ofthese appeals are as follows: The petitioners in W.P. Nos.35173 and 35225 of 1997 claimed that they were assigned Ac.3-00 cents of dry land each in S-No.59 of Kondapur village, Serilingampalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (formerly Hyderabad District) by the Tahsildar in proceedings No.A9/10897/ 61 dated 13-12-1961 under Rule 9{g) of Laoni Rules, 1950 and petitioners' father in W.P. No.35496/97 was assigned Ac.4-21 guntas in S.Nos.2, 3, 18 and 217 of Kondapur village in proceedings No.A9/10899 dated 13-12-1961. Ever since from the date of assignment they have been in possession and enjoyment of the said land by paying land revenue to the Government for the last 36 years and thus they are the lawful owners of the said land having participated in the auction and paid the bid amount towards the sale consideration. Inspite of the said assignment long back, the authorities have not carried out mutation in their favour except showing their possession. They made several representations requesting the respondents to grant mutation by issuing Supplementary Sethwar evidencing assignment in their favour. As there was no response from the official respondents, the petitioners earlier filed W.P. Nos.18605/97 and 18527/97 which were disposed of by this Court at the admission stage with a direction to the respondents to consider the request of the petitioners and pass appropriate order for mutation of their names in the revenue records. In pursuance of the said order the third respondent by the impugned proceedings No.ROR/951/ 1997, ROR/969/97 and ROR/912/97 dt.9-12-1997 rejected the request for mutation of their names in the revenue records as pattadars and issue of Supplementary Sethwar. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the above writ petitions to set aside the rejection order and direct the respondents to mutate their names in respect of the land assigned in their favour in revenue records and issue supplementary sethwar and also direct the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the said land.

(3.) The respondents filed a counteropposing the petition stating that the petitioners are encroachers over the land for which Sivai Jamabandi was imposed, but no land revenue was collected as alleged. The alleged patta certificates dt.13-12-1961 are the temporary written permission issued to the petitioners wherein no land revenue has been fixed. The land is not assigned to the petitioners in 'D' form under Assignment Rules existing in 1961 as per G.O.Ms. No.1406 dt.25-7-1958. As per the above Assignment Policy issued in the said G.O. said lands are not available for granting patta. The allegation of the petitioners that they were given pattas under 9(g) of Laoni Rules, 1950 is baseless and highly doubtful and as per the provisions of the new policy Gairon lands prohibited from assignment. It is also stated in para 5 that in the certificates issued in favour of the petitioner, the signature of Tahsildar is shown as 21-12-1961 whereas the date of issue of certificates as 13-12-1961, as such the certificates are highly doubtful and not genuine and same is liable to be investigated further. It is stated by the respondents that W.P. Nos.18605/97 and 18527/97 were disposed of at the admission stage on 7-8-97 and 8-8-97 respectively with a direction to the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners and dispose of the same. As per the above direction, notices were issued to the petitioners to produce the documentary evidence in support of their claim. Pursuant to the same, Xerox copies of letters of temporary written permission for occupation of Government land were filed by the writ petitioners and the representations have been disposed of on 10-12-1997 after giving an opportunity to defend their case. The petitioners are claiming the ownership over the Government land basing on written permission said to have been issued cannot be treated as assignment under the Assignment Rules existing as on the date of granting such permission. The petitioners are not entitled for any pattadar rights over the said land and the petitioners never made any representation except filing the writ petitions in the year 1997 and procedure for assignment issued in G.O.Ms. No.1406, dt.25-7-58 has not been followed, hence, they cannot derive any right as such in the property. In the impugned order, it is mentioned that as per revenue records there were some encroachers including the petitioners from the year 1969-70 to 1987-88 for which Sivai Jamabandi i.e., penalty was imposed on them. The alleged permission to enter into Government land was temporary and petitioners are not in possession of the land at present, therefore, the question of their mutation in the revenue records as Pattadars and issue of supplementary sethwar does not arise, and the alleged file where temporary permits were granted is not traceable as informed by the Mandal Revenue Officer.