POSINA RAMACHANDRAIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is directed against an order dated 28th August, 1997 passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, East Godavari, Kakinada in LRA No.15 of 1996 whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the petitioner herein was dismissed.

(2.) In view of the point that involves for consideration of this Court, it is not necessary to state the fact of the matter in details. Suffice it to point that the declarant Ramachandraiah was held to be holding as on the notified date, 1.3557 standard holdings in excess of the ceiling limit by order dated 13-3-1976 passed by the Land Reforms Tribunal, Kakinada, East Godavari District. The matter went up to the Supreme Court of India and the order of the Land Reforms Tribunal was upheld. The declarant Ramachandraiah in the said land ceiling case died during the pendency of the proceedings before the Land Reforms Tribunal and his wife Venkataratnamma was brought on record. It appears that the said Venkataratnamma also died but without impleading her heirs and legal representatives as parties, the impugned order has been passed by the Land Reforms Tribunal. It appears from the order dated 29-6-1996 that the learned Land Reforms Tribunal was aware of the said fact. But without impleading the heirs and legal representatives of Smt. Venkataratnamma, the order was only directed to be served as would appear from the following:

(3.) It is well settled that an order passed against a dead person is a nullity. It is not a case where a routine order was passed but by reason of the said order dated 15-4-1996, the excess lands at the hand of the declarant were computed. Had an opportunity been given to the legal representatives of the deceased declarant, they could have opted for some lands to be retained. As the matter was remitted back to the Primary Tribunal for determination, in the opinion of this Court, an opportunity should have been given to the Legal Representatives of the deceased petitioners, who have filed the present CRP. Therefore, they may be given an opportunity of hearing. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned orders are set aside. The petitioners shall appear before the first respondent-Authorised Officer, Land Reforms, East Godavari within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners shall co-operate with the Primary Tribunal in determination of the excess land. The petitioners should see to it that the respondent Nos.2 to 5 also appear before the first respondent within the aforementioned period. The CRP is accordingly allowed. No costs.