KOTESWARA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By G.O. Ms. No. 782, G.A. (General-A) Department, dated 27th December, 1968 the Governor of Andhra Pradesh proclaimed, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by sub-section (I) of section 15 of the Police Act, 186l, (hereinafter called the Act), that the arei comprised within Rompicherla Village in Narasaraopet Taluk, Guntur District, had been found to be in a disturbed state, and that it was expedient to increase the number of police in that area. The proclamation was directed to be in force for a period of one year. The Governor also sanctioned under section 15 (2) the quartering of Additional Police Force in the area. By G O. Ms. No. 270, dated 22nd ef April, 1969, the Government of Andhra Pradesh directed that the cost of the additional Police Force shall be borne out by the inhabitants of the area whose names were given in the annexure to the order or their farmlies, in accordance with apportionment made by the Magistrite under sub-section 4 of section 15. The amount of punitive tax imposed is Rs. 70, 954-28. Ps. Purporting to exercise his powers under sub-section (5) of section 15 the Governor exempted all the inhabitants of the area, other than those mentioned in the annexure, from liability to bear any portion of the cost of the additional Police Force employed. In the annexure eighty-:wo persons were named. The stationing of the Police Force was extended upto 1st September, 1970 Seventy out of the eighty two persons, against whom the punitive tax had been levied, challenged the imposition in W.P No. 4917 of 1971. Our learned brother, Obul Reddi. J. (as he then was) dismissed the petition by his order dated 19th March, 1973. This writ appeal is against thelearned Judge's order.

(2.) The principal allegations in the writ petition are: The principal communities in the village are Reddis, Kammas and Bhattarajus, the majority community being Reddis with about 200 houses and the Kammas constituted a minority community with only about 40 houses. The Reddi community belongs to ruling Congress party while the Kamma community belongs to Swatantra Party. The village was in the constituency of the then Chief Minister. Because of its political affiliation the Reddi community was backed up with political executive and police forces. Being thus situated, the Reddi community took the law into their hands and bad been committing several acts of violence resulting in number of criminal cases. One of them came up to this Court in Crl. A. Nos. 26 and 27 of 1969 wherein the High Court noticed in its judgment the existence of virulent factions. By G. O. Ms. No. 194 dated 21st February, 1966, punitive Police Force was stationed in the village from 11th March, 1966 to 10th September 1966 and its cost was imposed on both the parties. A number of security proceedings instituted are also referred to in the petition. The general elections to the Parliament and Legislative Assembly in 1967 made the factious spirit worse. Several complaints made by the petitioners belonging to the minority community to the Police and the political authorities were ignored. A number of atrocities alleged to have been committed by the majority community are then stated. While the various complaints given by the petitioners, were brushed aside, the Sub-Inspector of Police at the instance of the Congress Party filed security proceedings in M. C. No. 33 of 1967 against seventy-two persons of the petitioners group. In all the criminal cases mentioned in the security proctedings the accued were either discharged or acquitted. At the time of the filing of the writ petition, i. e, 17th November, 1971, two security proceedings weie pending against the majority group, which is claimed to demonstrate the violent activities of that group. Once again additional Police force was stationed in the village from 2nd January 1969 to Ist September 1970. But, the punitive tax this time has been imposed only against the group of the petitioners which consists of Kammas and some Reddis. No notice of the proceeding,i was given to them and the petitioners came to know of the impoisition only when the Sub-Inspector of Police denanded from this huge amount. The tax has been imposed exclusively on one group and the entire opposition groud was excluded, though they have always been the aggressors. Some persons against whom the tax was imposed were dead and some were never the residents of the village. The imposition of the tax exclusivelyon one group is highly discriminative and arbitrary. In the absence of notifications under section 15 (3) and (5) no levy could be made on tha petitioners exclusively. No enquiry was conducted as to the means of ths peti-tioners and their guilt, and the imposition and apportionment of the tax are arbitrary. The petitioners, therefore sought an appropriate writ declaring the procedings of the District Collector. Guntur, in R.C. No. 284 j of 1970 dated 28th February, 1971, as unconstitutional, illegal and void The impugned proceeding of the District Collector is the one addressed to the Superintendent of Police directing collection of punitive tax of Rs 70,954-28, from the petitioners and others.

(3.) The State of Andhra Pradesh, the Collector and the District Magistrate, Guntur, the Superindent of Police, Guntar and the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nakrekal are the four respondents to the writ petition. They have filed the counter affidavit with the following averments. The amount of tax was apportioned among the factories with reference to the property owned by them as per the proceedings of the District Collector, dated 28th December, 1971. Tt is false that the Police was sheltering the Reddi community. It is true that punitive force was stationed in the year 1955 and the punitive tax then imposed was collected from both the factions as both of them were responsible for the disturbed state of the area. The Government in their G.O. No, 270 dated 22nd April, 1969 had ordered that the cost of the additional Police force should be borne by the inhabitants whose onmes were given in the annexure to the order. The total cost was apportioned among 82 factionists mentioned in the G. O As per proposals of the Superintendent of Police, Guntur in bis proceedings dated 21st September, 1968 for quartering of punitive Police force and the report of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Narasaraopet dated 11th November, 1968, it is clearly established that the pstitioners were responsible for establishing the Police force. So, they alone are liable to pay the punitive tax The Government have power to exempt any person from paying the tax if he is not responsible for the trouble It is not necessary that all the inhabitants of the village should be taxed. Sines the eighty-two persons shown in the annexure were found to be responsible for the disturbed state of the village, the total cost was apportioned amoag them. The apportionment was made on the basis of the properties owned by the factionists. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Narasaraopet, mads a report dated 11th November, 1968 about the property particulars of the porsons amongst whem the amount was apportioned. The reports of the Suprimtendent of Police and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Narasaraopet clearly establish that the petitioners and the other 12 factionists were responsible for the disturbed state of the village and they were squarely responsible for stationing ounitive force to maintain law and order, which is the primary res-pestbiliiy ot the State The apportionment was made on ihc basis of the property owned by them. So, there was no arbitrariness about the imposition. it appears that the principal contention urged before the learned single Judge is that there was a denial of equal opportunity and equal protection of laws to the petitioners and there was no reason to exempt the members of the opposite faction from payment of the tax. The learned Judge pointed out that the reports of the Superintendent of Police and the Sub-Dvisional Magistrate showed that the petitioners and other members of the party were responsible for the violent activities and not the other group. The District Magistrate is the competent person to mike enquiries and the petitioners did not appear to have made any representations to him The Government had powers to exempt any person from paying the tax, if he was not responsible for violent activities. The Act do;s not contemplate that all the inhabitants should be made liable to pay the punitive tax. Since the enquiry disclosed that eighty-two persons were responsible for the dis urbed conditions in the village, the expenditure incurred wat apportioned among them. Apportionment was mad after due eaquiry as per the report of the Superintendent of Police and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate.