M SEETHARAMACHANDRA Vs. SURISETTI RAMAMURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Appeal No. 363/78 arises against W P No. 460/74 dated November 16, 1977, dismissing the writ petition and confirming the order of remand made by the Estates Abolition Tribunal (District Judge), Visakhapatnam made in Tribunal Appeal Suit No. 24/70. A S Nos. 68 and 686 of 1978 arise against decree in 0 P No. 105/67 by different tenants/ claimants. Since common questions of law and facts arise for decision. It is agreed that they can be disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) The Writ Appeal concerns Ac. 15-02 cents of land known as Godavari Manyam situated in Dondaparthi village in China Waltair Zamin estate and it was covered by Original Survey No, 2, The Government, in exercise of the power under section 1(4) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and conversion into Ryotwari) Act (26 of 1948), for short, "the act" notified and had taken over the entire China Waltair Zamin estate, including the Godavari Manyam, the land in dispute, on January 12, 1951. As a consequence, by operation of Section 3 (b) with effect from and on that date, the entire estate including the minor inam, post-settlement or presettlement included in the assets of the Zamindari estate at the permanent settlement of that estate..................... shall stand transferred to the Government and vest in them from from all encumbrances and the Madras Revenue Recovery Act 1864 and the Madras Irrigation Cess Act, 1865 and all other enactments applicable to ryotwari areas shall apply to the estate. Under Section 3 (d), the Government ar.e entitled to. forthwith take Possession of the estate and -under the Proviso thereto, the Government shall not dispossess any person of any land in the estate in respect of which they consider prima facie entitled to a ryotwari patta to the persons adumbrated under Clauses (i) and (ii) thereof. The land in dispute was surveyed under sec. 22 and it was correlated as R S No. 40. It was further sub-divided as RS No. 40/1 to 5. The land revenue payable to the Government was effected on the land in dispute under sec. 23 of the Act. The Assistant Settlement Officer, Anakapalli, in his proceedings bearing SR No. 15 (1)/226/58/Visakhapatnam initiated suo motu enquiry under sec. 15 (1) of the Act. In the enquiry, Mosalikanti Sitara- machandra Rao, the first appellant, oneof the land holders was examined on behalf of the land holders on September 18, 1958. He admitted therein that the lands are Darimila inam the grant was made 100 years ago in favour of his ancestors, that grant is not burdened with any service whatsoever and they are in their personal enjoyment from its inception. They are garden topes. Therefore they are entitled to ryotwari patta. The Assistant 'Settlement Officer considered the evidence and hold that it is a ryotl land but a garden topa and therefore the land holders are entitled to ryotwari patta which was issued under sec. 12 (b) (ii) of the Act. It is to note that in that inquiry, no notice was issued to the tenants. Therefore the respondents original tenants or their successors in interest filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, but with I A 7/76 to condone the delay. The landholders-respondents did not come forword in the counterfilad thereat that the lands are presettlement enfrenchised minor inam lands and that they are not covered under the provisions of the Act. They supported the legality of the issue of patta under Sec. 12. The delay was condoned. Thereafter, it was numbered as T A No. 12 of 1966. While the appeal is pending, the landholders appears to have sold away the lands to appellants 5 to 7 who were impleaded themselves by order in I A No. 81/1987 as respondents to the appeal. They raised for the first time the plea that the property in dispute does not bear the name of Godavari Manyam. It is an enfranchised pre-settlement minor inam, not burdened with service and therefore it is outside the purview of the Act. Their predecessor-in-title obtained a patta under the Andhrs Pradesh (Andhra Area). Inams Abolition and Conversion Act (37 of 1956) for short, "the Inams Act", under Ex. P-6 dated August, 30, 1970 and therefore the proceedings before the the Assistant Settlement Officer is redundant and that they are not claiming any patta under Sec 12 (b) (ii) of the Act. It is admitted that no notice in the enquiry under Sec. 15 (1) of the Act was given to the respondents-tenants and the respondents insisted upon an enquiry being held. Accordingly, by judgment dated September 22, 1967, the Estates Abolition Tribunal (District Judge) Visakhapatnam allowed the appeal, set aside the order dated October 8, 1959, and remitted the matter for fresh enquiry. Thereafter, the Settlement Officer by order dated August 31, 1970 held that the lands are pre-settlementenfranchised minor inam covered under T 0 Mo. 188 and therefore they are not Darmils inam lands and as such enquriy under See. 15 (1) Is not Maintainable. Accordingly, the proceedings were dropped. Assailing the correctness thereof, the respondents again filed an appeal, being T A No. 24/70. The Estates Abolition Tribunal, Visakhapatnem, by judgment dated December 5, 1973, held that the Settlement Officer has no jurisdiction to go into the tenure pf the lands ; he has to consider whether the landholders are entitled to patta and accordingly, set aside the order and remitted for fresh enquiry according to law. Assailing the.correctness of this order, the writ petition has been filed, and as stated earlier, our learned brother Jeevan Reddy, J, has confirmed the order of remand. Thus the writ appeal.

(3.) While these proceedings are pending, an extent of Ac. 30-00 covered by various survey numbers was notified on November, 4, 1965 under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for a public purpose viz. to construct staff quarters to the Sough Eastern Railway employees. The notification covers an extent of Ac. 1-84 cents out of these Survey Nos. 40/1 to 5, along with Survey Nos. 41/2-A 41/2-B and other Survey Nos. The tenants who are claimants Nos. 57, 58 and 68 la'd claim to Ac. 1-48 cents for payment of compensation and Claimants 69 and 79 laid claim for payment of compensation to S Nos 41/2-A and 41/2-B and other lands which are known as Mallavani Chelaka. Similarly, the land-holders also laid their claim and as there is a dispute of title, the compensation awarded in Award No. 5/67 dated February 24, 1967 was deposited in the Civil Court and made a reference under Sec. 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. It was numbered as 0 P No 105/67. The Civil Court relying upon the patta Ex. P-6 granted under the Inams Act and also relying upon the proceedings of the Settlement Officer dated 31, 1970 subject of the writ appeal, and other evidence adduced held that though the tenants are in possession for a long time it concluded that since it is inam lands the landholders are entitled to compensation as owners of the lands. Assailing the correctness thereof, the above two first appeals have been filed,