G RAMAPPA Vs. SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order passed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in Memorandum No. 43778-B/57-1 dated 24-9-1957 directing the provisional assignment to the 3rd respondent of the tends in Survey Nos. 512/2A/2, 512/2B and 472/2 excluding the portion of a site occupied by the poor Harijans in the village of T. Sodam in Chittoor District.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that in 1950, the 3rd respondent herein was provisionally assigned certain poramhoke lands in T. Sodam village and that upon the representations made by the villagers, the Tahsildar, Madanapalli submit led a report, E 1-9909/53 dated 13-10-1955 and that the Sub-Collector by his proceedings D. Dis, No. 19161/55 dated 20-10-1955 cancelled the provisional assignment except in regard to Survey No. 273/1. Thereupon the 3rd respondent preferred an appeal to the Collector, and the Collector of Chittoor in D. Dis. No. 23514/55 dated 1-9-1956 substantially dismissed the appeal. In regard to an extent of about 1 1/2 acres of land under the cultivation of the 3rd respondent in S. No. 512/2A/2 and S. No. 512/2B, the appeal was allowed. By Memorandum No. 454-B/56-7, dated the 26th of March 1957, the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, dismissed the application of the 3rd respondent and confirmed the order of the Collector.But, on a fresh application dated 22-4-57 filed by the 3rd respondent for reconsidering the Government Memo No. 454-B/56-57, dated the 26th of March 1957, the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Revenue Department, passed an order on 34th of September, 1957 in Memorandum No. 43778-B/57-1 dated the 24th of September 1957 in the following terms:

(3.) The contentions raised by Sri A. Bhujenga Rao, the learned advocate for the petitioners, were: (i) that under the Boards Standing Orders, the Government of Andhra Pradesh had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal or revision as against the order of the Collector of Chittoor dated 1-9-1956: (2) that even assuming that the Government of Andhra a Pradesh had such Jurisdiction it had power to review the earlier order passed in March 1957; (3) that the order passed in September 1957 was vitiated by reason of no notice being given to the villagers who objected to the assignment of the land in favour of the 3rd respondent, and Justly (4) that the order was vitiated as no reasons me given for reviewing and going behind the earlier order passed in March 1957. On behalf of the Government and the 3rd respondent, two preliminary objections were raised viz, that the petitioners were not entitled to maintain, the application for the issue of a writ of Certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution inasmuch as they had no legal rights in the poramboke lands and (2) that they had an alternative remedy by way of suit As I am inclined to uphold the preliminary objections, I think it is unnecessary to deal with the merits of the application in detail.