KALIDINDI LAKSHMINARASARAJU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This C. R. P. arises under Section 21 of Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner is a declarant who filed his declaration as provided under Section 8 of the Act with regard to the land held by him. He has given 25 items of land in the declaration and out of it, for items 19 to 25 he claimed exemption on the ground that they were alienated by him. As the exemption was granted by the Tribunals, we are not now concerned with those items. We are concerned in this revision with items 1 to 18. Out of these items, the Tribunal considered items 15 to 18 of a total extent of Ac. 0-45 cents as "single crop wet land" and items 1 to 14 as double crop wet lands. The petitioner questions the correctness of the view this taken by the Tribunals.

(2.) According to the petitioner, items 15 to 18 are registered dry lands and the Tribunals went wrong in treating them as single crop wet lands, and items 1 to 14 should not have been considered by the Tribunals as double crop wet lands.

(3.) Admittedly items 15 to 18 were registered as dry lands and items 1 to 14 were registered as wet lands in the revenue registers of the Government. It is also an admitted fact that items 1 to 14 were included in Schedule B in the Draft Rules published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated 16-7-1962 as per the G. O. Ms. No. 140 Public Works dated 19-1-62 which is known as Localisation G. O. Admittedly items 15 to 18, though they are registered dry lands are included in the Ayacut of a Government source of irrigation and wet crops are raised in them. Therefore it is the contention of the Government that these items though registered as dry lands are to be deemed to be wet lands within the meaning of the definition given to wet land in Section 3(v) of the Act. With regard to items 1 to 14 the contention of the petitioner is that though they are wet lands and also included in the Schedule B, they cannot be treated as double crop wet lands because no dufassal crop has been raised with the use of the water from the Government source of irrigation in any four fasli years within six fasli years in question (Faslis 1378 to 1383) for want of supply of water from the Government source of irrigation.