R KANAKAMMA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR NELLORE DIST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has a long and Chequered career. In a way, this is a continuation of the previous round of litigation. The sole petitioner died during the pendency of the writ petition. Her legal representatives were brought on record. Since there is no conflict of interests, reference in this writ petition to petitioner shall be to herself, her husband and her legal representatives, dependingupon the context. The facts in brief are as under:

(2.) The land in Sy.No.319/2 of Bit-11 of Nellore, admeasuring Ac.5.75 cents, belongs to Sri Venugopala Swamy Temple, Nellore (for short 'the Temple'). One Late Rama Swamy, the husband of the petitioner was granted lease in respect of the said land on 24-3-1934 for a period of 50 years. He is said to have raised a mango garden and constructed a farmhouse therein. During the subsistence of the lease, A.P. (Andhra Area) Tenancy Area Act came to be enacted in the year 1956 (for short 'the Tenancy Act'). The tenancy in respect of the land in question was covered by the provisions of the Tenancy Act. The Temple filed ATC.No.37/1981 seeking eviction of the tenant. The same was dismissed. An appeal in ATA.No.10/1991 filed before the Appellate Authority was also dismissed on 28-1-1991. This order is said to have become final.

(3.) On 6-4-1994, the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Mandal Revenue Officer, Nellore, respondents 2 and 3 herein, are said to have visited the site and attempted to demarcate and fix the boundaries. Apprehending threat to her possession, the petitioner filed WP.No.7434/1994 in this court. Interim orders were passed therein. The respondents in the said writ petition, however, contended that the road margin of one of the public roads in the Nellore town was encroached by several persons and to rehabilitate them, the land belonging to the Temple was identified. It was also stated that even by the time the interim orders were passed by this court, the land was occupied by the displaced persons. Necessary amendments were made to the writ petition. Ultimately, the writ petition was allowed through orders dated 18-l-1996, holding that on account of the unauthorized state action, the right of the petitioner under Article 231 of the Constitution is violated, that the petitioner be restored possession of the land within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and that she be paid compensation at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per acre from the date of dispossession till the date of restoration.