KODANDA RAO Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ Appeal directed against writ petition No: 2766/77 and Writ petition 1000/78 raise one common question of law, viz., Whether the suo motu revisional powers vested in the Director of Settlements under Section 5 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, hereinafter referred to as Estates Abolition Act, could be exercised even after a lapse of twelve to thirteen years or have to be exercised within a reasonable time.

(2.) In the writ Appeal, a further question arises as to whether the suo motu revisional powers could be exercised notwithstanding the dismissal of a revision petition filed earlier as time-barred.

(3.) The appellants in the writ Appeal are the writ petitioners. It it their case that they were granted Ryotwari patta by the Settlement Officer, Visakhapatnam under section 11 of the Estates Abolition Act in the year 1960 in respect of certain lands in Marripalem village in the estate of Talagam. Long after the patta was granted, the District Collector, Srikakulam filed a revision petition before the Director of Settlements in the year 1971. That revision petition was filed along with ft petition for condonation of delay. By an order dated 2-1-1971, the Director of Settlements dismissed the petition as baired by limitation and on the ground that the order of the Settlement Officer had become final, in his D. Dis No: 27125/A3/71. That order became final. The Director of Settlements hoswever, issued a notice dated 5-2-1974 stating that under the powers conferred upon him under Section 5(2) of the Act, he has taken up suo motu revisional enquiry regarding the lands in respect of which patta was granted to the appellants. The appellants entered appeurance and raised a preliminary objection that in view of the fact that the earlier revision petition filed by the Collector wag dismissed, he had no jurisdiction to take up suo motu enquiry under section 5(2) of the Act. The Director of settlements by his order dated 13-6-1974 in R.P.No: 84/73 negatived the appellant's contenstion and proposed to proceed further in exercise of his suo motu revisional powers. Against the said order, the appellants preferred a further revision to the Commissioner of Survey and Settlements and Land Records, Andbra Pradesh. The Commissioner dismissed the petition in C. P, Mis. No; 150/77 dated 1-6-1977 holding that the Director of Settlements could exercise the suo motu powers of revision and that there was nothing to exclude the case in question. The Board of Revenue by its order dated 1-6-1977 dismissed the revision and the writ Petition was directed against the said proceedings of the Board of Revenue and the Director of Settlements.