KANDRIGA SUBBA REDDY Vs. GOVT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the inaction of the Respondents in implementing the settlement patta granted by Respondent No. 2 on 22.12.1980 and confirmed by the Director of Settlements, the Commissioner of Appeals and this Court, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

(2.) The averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition would show that the father of Petitioner No. 1 by name late K. Chenga Reddy made an application under Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (for short, "the Act") for grant of a settlement patta in respect of Ac.8.00 comprised in Sy. No. 134 and Ac.4.60 cents in Sy. No. 136/1 of Daminedu Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal. The Settlement Officer, after holding enquiry, granted settlement patta vide his proceedings S.R. No. 61/11(a)/80/CTR, dated 22.12.1980. The settlement patta was questioned by the District Collector, Chittoor, by way of a revision filed under Section 5(2) of the Act before the Special Commissioner and Director of Settlements, A.P. The said revision was dismissed by order dated 08.06.2000. A further revision filed before the Commissioner of Appeals ended in its dismissal under order dated 22.11.2003. The District Collector, Chittoor, filed Writ Petition No. 16781 of 2008 against these orders. The said Writ Petition was dismissed, whereby the hierarchical orders passed in favour of the Petitioners received affirmation. It is the pleaded case of the Petitioners that as the said order was not questioned in letters patent by the Collector or any other officer, the same has attained finality. The grievance of the Petitioners is that though they have been approaching Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for implementation of the settlement patta by incorporating their names in the revenue records and issuing pattadar pass books and title deeds, no steps in this direction have been taken by the said Respondents. The Petitioners further pleaded that from the time of their ancestors their family is in continuous possession of the land for more than 66 years and non-implementation of the settlement patta is disabling them from raising loans from the Banks or other financial institutions. That even in the month of September, 2010 the Petitioners have personally met Respondent No. 3 with a reminder to implement the settlement patta on which the latter has informed that Respondent No. 2 has directed him not to implement the patta and that when the Petitioners met Respondent No. 2 personally, he claimed that Sy. No. 134 admeasuring Ac.8.00 is a Government land. It is averred that the stand of Respondent No. 2 is contrary to the settlement patta, as confirmed in revisions and the Writ Petition and is patently arbitrary.

(3.) When this Writ Petition came up on 02.11.2010, this Court called upon the Respondents to report to the Court the reasons for non-implementation of the settlement patta, which has become final. As no instructions were reported by the learned Assistant Government Pleader on 13.12.2010, personal presence of Respondent No. 3 was ordered. Accordingly, he was present in the Court on 20.12.2010 and counter affidavit of Respondent No. 1 was filed.