KILARI AYYANNA PATRUDU Vs. GOVT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the State Government is required to record reasons for refusing to grant exemption under Section 20 (1)(b) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act') is the question which arises for determination in these petitions filed by Kilari Ayyanna Patrudu, Kilari Venkata Chinnayya Patrudu and Kilari Satyanarayana Patrudu under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing Memos dated 28-9-1996 issued by Deputy Secretary to Government, Revenue (U.C.I) Department.

(2.) The petitioners are sons of Kilari Appalaswamy Patrudu (hereinafter referred to as the 'land owner') who owned 8782 sq. mtrs. of land comprised in Survey Number 5/3 of Gullalapalem Village, which falls in the urban agglomeration area of Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation. After coming into force of the , the land owner filed a declaration under Section 6 (1) thereof. The Special Officer and Competent Authority, Visakhapatnam (hereinafter described as 'the Special Officer'), after making necessary enquiry, held that the land owner was having 7282 sq. mtrs. surplus land. On appeal, Commissioner of Land Reforms and Urban Land Ceiling remanded the case to the Special Officer for fresh determination of the surplus area of the land owner. After making de-novo enquiry, the Special Officer passed order dated 24-11-1983 whereby he declared that the land owner and his two major sons were having 3947.546 sq. mtrs. of surplus land. Neither the land owner nor his sons challenged that order by filing appeal or by availing appropriate legal remedy. After about 1 year 2 months, notification under Section 10 (1) of the Act was issued. The same was published in A.P. Gazette dated 14-2-1985. This was followed by declaration dated 29-7-1986 issued under Section 10 (3) of the Act. The land owner died in 1985. After his death, the petitioners entered into a family settlement under which each one of them got share of over 1315 Sq. mtrs. of surplus land. In July, 1987, the petitioners filed separate applications under Section 20 (l)(b) of the Act for arrant of exemption from the provisions of Chapter III. In his application, Kilari Ayyanna Patrudu claimed exemption by setting out the following facts:

(3.) In his application, Kilari Satyanarayana Patrudu averred as under: