GOVERNMENT OF A P Vs. SATYANARAYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the proper interpretation of the proviso to Section 11 of the Estates Abolition Act that is involved in this Writ Appeal.

(2.) The Respondent is the resident of Amudalapalli situate in the then Vuyyur estate of the Krishna District, claiming that he was inducted into possession of Ac. 6.02 cents of land by the then Zamindar of Vuyyur and that the patta therefor was subsequently granted to him on 19-7-1946. He invoked the provisions of Section 11 of the Estates Abolition Act. The proper Assistant Settlement Officer rejected this application on the ground that the land in dispute formed part of the Budameru River poramboke, although he found that the respondent was in fact admitted into possession in 1944 and patta was assigned in 1946. The aggrieved respondent carried the matter in appeal to the Settlement Officer. The Settlement Officer, being of opinion that this was ryoti land and was not included in the river poramboke, that the respondent was in possession and enjoyment of this land from 1944 and that a patta was issued to him in 1946 by the then landlord set aside the order of the Assistant Settlement Officer and directed the issue of patta to him.

(3.) One of the persons who opposed the issue of patta to the respondent before the Assistant Settlement Officer on the plea that it was a river poramboke carried a revision to the Director of Settlements. This authority reversed the order of Settlement Officer, having come to the conclusion that it was not ryoti land and restored that of the Assistant Settlement Officer.