YARRAMCHETTI SURYACHANDRA RAO Vs. ANIVELLA VENKATA SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in this case relate to a parcel of land in Vallurupalli village particularised in the Schedule annexed to S. R. No, 15 (i)-4/68 on the file of the Assistant Settlement Officer. Vallurupalli village was an Estate and was taken over on March 2 1965. Amivella Venkata Satyanarayana Murthy (Murthy) sought patta for the schedule land under Section 15 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and conversion into Ryotwari) Act 26 of 1948 ('the Act'). That application was notified for enquiry and all concerned were informed to file objections, if any. Objections were filed and an enquiry was made. On June 25, 1968 it was held the land is a private land'. The application of Murthy was ordered. The objections by the ryots of Vallurupalli were rejected, The order of June 25 was the subject metter of further proceedings. Appeal preferred by the ryots was dismissed on April 25, 1973. The ryots approached this court (Writ Petition No. 2388/74) which was heard with another Writ Petition No. 6722 of 1974. The two writ petitions were dismissed on April 6, 1976. The ryots further carried the matter in Writ Appeal No. 399 of 1976, which was dismissed on December 7,1977. Thus, proceedings terminated with the order of the Court holding the schedule land was a private land. Murthy thereupon lodged proceedings for eviction of illegal occupants and filed suits to recover arrears of rent and damages against some others.

(2.) The instant proceedings have been launched by another set of 35 ryots who also are from Vallurupalli. They made the application under Section 56 (1) (c) of the Act for grant of patta in their favour. Many among the 35 ryots were not parties to earlier proceedings which terminated on December 7, 1977. Murthy in whose favour the earlier Proceedings terminated in Writ Appeal No. 399 of 1976, sought for a Writ of Prohibition to interdict the enquiry and further proceedings filed by the 35 ryots. A learned single Judge in the order under appeal allowed the Writ Petition. In that necessary details as to the proceedings after the village Vallurupalli was taken over on March 2, 1965 till the disposal of writ appeal 399 of 1976 are referred and the writ petition is ordered. Hence appeal by the ryots.

(3.) The 35 ryots now seek patta in their application under section 56 (1) (c) of the Act The lerned single Judge held the lands were the subject matter of Writ Appeal 399 of 1976. This Court held the lands were 'private lands' and concluded saying that the present proceedings initialed by ryots are launched to circumvent the earlier orders holding that the lands are private lands. In the circumstances proceedings under section 11 or under section 56 (1) (c) of the Act are not maintainable.