PILLARISETTI HARINATH BABU Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in these two writ petitions claim to be the owners and possessors of Ac.1.31 guntas of land situated in Sy.No.228 of Bandarugudem village, Manuguru Mandal, Khammam district, which is notified as a scheduled area. The 2nd petitioner is the son of the 1st petitioner. It is stated that the 1st petitioner purchased the above said land in the year 1961 from the grandfather of respondent No.4 by name Bandaru Tirumali. Having purchased the said land, the petitioners constructed two houses in a part of the land and raised mango garden in the rest of the land. It is also claimed that soon after pu rchase, the necessary mutations were effected in the revenue records and, title deed and pattedar pass book were also issued in favour of the 1st petitioner by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Manuguru Mandal after due enquiry as to the title and possession.

(2.) While so, on a complaint made by the father of the 4th respondent, by name Chennabbai, proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959, for eviction of the petitioner, however, the Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Badrachaiam, after hearing both the parties and, on appreciation of the material on record, by order dated 2-2-1984 dismissed the said eviction proceedings. In spite of the same, the grandfatherof the 4th respondent again invoked the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959, seeking eviction of the 1st petitioner. The said proceedings were dropped by the Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, by order dated 4-12-1987 on the ground that the matter was already concluded by virtue of the earlierorderdated 2-2-1984 in the proceedings initiated by the father of the 4th respondent. Again the grandfather of the 4th respondent filed a petition for eviction, but the same was also dismissed on 1-7-1992. Admittedly, all the said orders have become final.

(3.) While so, the 1st respondent issued a notice calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why they should not be ejected from the land in question. The contents of the said notice show that the proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 suo motu by the 1st respondent-Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Badrachaiam, alleging that the petitioners who are non-tribals were in possession of the land in question, illegally. The petitioners were called upon to attend the hearing on 3-10-2002. Accordingly, the petitioners appeared before the 1st respondent and filed a counter on 10-12-2002 through their counsel denying all the allegations. However, on 22-12-2002 the petitioners were served with a copy of the order dated 11-11-2002 passed by the 1st respondent directing ejection of the petitioners from 0.10 guntas, out of Ac. 1.31 guntas of the land in their possession. Aggrieved by the same, the 1st petitioner preferred an appeal before the Agent to the Government/District Collectoron24-12-2002. Pending the said appeal, since the appellate authority failed to consider the application for interim stay, the 1stpetitionerfiled W.P.No.357 of 2003. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by orderdated 8-1-2003 granting stay of operation of the order of eviction dated 11-11-2002. In the meanwhile, the 2nd respondent/Additional Agent to the Government/Project Officer, ITDA., Badrachaiam, was conferred with the appellate powers and, accordingly, the appeal (C.M.A.No.1 of 2003) pending on the file of the Agent to the Government, was made over to respondent No.2 and renumbered as C.M.A.No.97 of 2003.