STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. PASELA MURALI MOHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision filed by the State against the order of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Rajahmundry dated 11-11-1977. The respondent filed a declaration under Section 8(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973. With regard to two Survey numbers viz.. Survey Nos. 293/1 and 293/2 in Jambupatnam village the declarant claimed that they should not be treated as wet lands as no irrigated crop has been raised in four fasli years within a continuous period of 6 fasli years immediately before the specified date for want of supply of water. Similarly, the declarant contended that the lands in Survey Nos. 471/5, 444/3, 476/2 and 478/2 situate in Narasapuram village ought not to be treated as single crop wet lands for the same reason. According to the declarant these lands cannot be treated as wet lands in view of the proviso to Section 3(v)(iii). These contentions were rejected by the Land Reforms Tribunal, holding that the lands comprising in the said Survey numbers were registered as single crop wet lands and hence they were computed as such to the holding of the declarant.

(2.) The declarant carried the matter in appeal to the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal and reiterated the same contentions. The Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal accepted the contentions of the declarant and held that the lands situated in Jambupatnam as well as Narasapuram villages belonging to the petitioner cannot be treated as wet lands. With regard to the lands situate In Jambupatnam village, the Appellate Tribunal found that in Fasli 1378 only dry crops were raised with rain water and in Fasli 1382 though paddy crop was raised, the same has failed for want of supply of water from the tank. For Fasli 1381 also the Appellate Tribunal found that the crop failed for want of water. In arriving at this conclusion it relied upon Ex. D. 7 which is a remark in Column No. 10 in the 5(l) account of the Revenue Record. The Tribunal held that since there was no irrigated crop from a Government source of water supply within three fasli years out of the six fasli years preceding the notified date the lands must be treated as wet lands. With regard to the lands in Narasapuram village the finding of the Appellate Tribunal is "that there was no irrigated crop" in Survey Nos. 471/5, 444/3, 476/2 and 478/2 in Fasli 1376 and that the crops failed for want of supply of water in Faslis 1381 and 1382. Hence the Appellate Tribunal did not treat them as wet lands having regard to the proviso to Section 3(v) of the Act.

(3.) In this Civil Revision Petition, the main contention of the learned Government Pleader Mr. Balaiah is that merely because the crops have failed due to want of supply of water, they cannot be treated as dry lands nor do they cease to be wet lands and the proviso to Section 3(v) of the Act has no application to such a situation. On the other hand it is contended on behalf of the respondents-declarants that the classification made by the Appellate Tribunal is right in view of the language employed in the proviso to sub-clause (v) of Clause III of the Act which deals with the definition of wet land. In order to resolve this controversy jt is necessary to refer to Section 3 Clause (v) of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 hereinafter called the Act. It reads as follows: