K GOVINDA REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Writ Appeals are diected against the common order of our learned brother Kumarayya, J., in Writ Petition Nos. 456/64, 775/65, 445/65, 827/65, 56/65 and 240/65. These petitions along with others were filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issue of Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, directing the respondent viz., the Government of Andhra Pradesh and its Revenue Officers not to collect the betterment contribution under the Tungabhadra. Project Low Level Canal Work, in pursuance of the notices issued under section 5 (1) of the Andhra Irrigation (Levy of Betterment Contribution) Act (XXV of 1955).

(2.) The Andhra Irrigation (Levy of Betterment Contribution) Act (XXV of 1955) 'hereinafter referred to as the Act), as originally passed, received the assent of the Governor on 29th December, 1955 and it came into force ever since in the State of Andhra and a similar Act known as Hyderabad Irrigation, Betterment Contribution and Inclusion Fees Act V of 1952 was then in force in the erstwhile Hyderabad State. On account of the reorganisation of the States, certain parts of the erstwhile Hyderabad State, known as Telangana area, came to be included in the Andhra Area and the new State came to be known as Andhra Pradesh. By virtue of the Andhra Pradesh Extention and Amendment Act 1959 (XXXVII of 1959) the Hyderabad Act was repealed and the provisions of the Andhra Act (XXV of 1955) were extended to the whole of Telangana Area. Under the provisions of this Act, the Government was entitled to levy a betterment contribution from the owner of any land which, in their opinion, benefited or is capable of being benefited by the completion of the construction, expansion or alteration by Government of any work at any time after 1947 in Andhra Area and after the commencement of Act XXXVII of 1959 in the Telangana Area.

(3.) The appellants herein are the owners of lands situated in various villages under the irrigable command of the Tungabhadra Project Low Level Canal Works. Under section 5 of the Act, notices had been published in the Gazette specifying the lands under the commandable ayacut of the Tungabhadra Project Low Level Canal Works and calling for objections and objections were filed on several grounds and the enquiring officer overruled all of them and on his recommendation, the District Collector passed an order dated 9th April, 1962 acting under section 6 of the Act, determining the betterment contribution payable by the appellants. Appeals preferred by the land-owners to the Board of Revenue under section 7 of the Act and the revisions filed thereafter to the Government under section 8 of the Act were all dismissed and they thereafter filed the Writ Petitions, questioning the validity of the Act and its provisions and the competence of the Legislature to pass this enactment. It was contended that there was excessive delegation of legislative power, in as much as the right to fix the rate was delegated to the authority without laying proper criteria or guidelines, that as the rate of contributions was to be anything upto 50 per cent, in the rise in value between 1945 and 1957, the fact that the increase in value was due to other causes and not merely due to the irrigation facility provided, had been lost sight of in the levy, that it was not a betterment contribution but a detriment contribution as some of the lands had suffered. All these contentions were rejected by the learned Judge and the applications were dismissed. Hence these appeals before us.. W.P.No. 347 of 1963 :-This petition has also been filed challenging the provisions of the same Act by a person owning 25 acres of wet land in the villages of Chembedu and Ghennappa Naidu Peta which were getting irrigated through Chembedu Pedda Cheruvu which drains water from the river Swarnamukhi, through Chembedu channel. On account of construction of an anicut across the river Swarnamukhi in the year 1956, notices were issued under the Act for the levy of betterment contribution and this petition has been filed questioning the levy on constitutional and other grounds for the issue of a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the respondents to forbear from enforcing the provisions of the said Act.