K ANNAPURANAMMA Vs. P KOTESWARA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these matters are connected and can be disposed of by a common order.

(2.) An extent of Ac. 5-35 Cents in Survey No. 367/1 situated in Te egalavancha village, Chintalapudi Taluk in West Godavari District, was assigned to one P. Koteswara Rao, son of Vigneswarudu in the year 1962 and D-form patta as provided under the A.P. Board of Revenue Standing Order No. 15 also was granted in his favour. In 1968 the assignee leased out the land in favour of Koganti Annapurnamma, who shall hereinafter be referred to as "the transferee". The lease was for 99 years. According to the transferee, this is a sale, though a lease. In the year 1977, the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act (Act 9 of 1977), (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), prohibiting the transfer of assigned lands by landless poor came into force. On 27-3-1978 the assignee made on application to the Tahsildar, to declare the transfer as null and void and to restore the same to him. The Tahsildar dismissed the same holding that it is sale and the land in question was purchased by a landless poor in a bonafide manner and he is saved by sub-section 5 of Sec. 3 of the said Act. Questioning the same, the assignee filed an appeal before the Collector, which was transferred to the Joint Collector and the joint Collector by his order dt. 2-2-81 declaring that both are landless poor, passed a strange order allotting 21/2 acres to the assignee and the balance to the transferee. Questioning the same the transferee filed W. P. No. 4482 of 1983 and the assignee filed W. P. No. 7971 of 1983. As against the original order of the Tahsildar, the assignee filed W. P. No. 10547 of 1984. All these three writ petitions were disposed of by a common order by our learned brother Raghuveer, J. (as he then was). He allowed W.P. No. 1054 of 1984 filed by the assignee on the ground that Survey Nos. mentioned in the D. form Patta and the lease-deed are not tallying and that the identity of the land, therefore, is in dispute, and remanded the matter to the Tahsildar to make a fresh Enquiry, the other two writ petitions filed against the order of the Joint Collector were also consequently allowed on the ground that the Joint Collector has no jurisdiction to pass such an order. Aggrieved by the order passed in W.P. No. 10547 of 1984 the transferee filed Writ Appeal No. 171 of 1985. It appears, some other extent of land situated in the same village was assigned to the sister of the assignee and that was also leased out by her in favour of the transferee and since she died, her daughter filed a petition before the Tahsildar for restoration and that was allowed. The transferee, aggrieved by the same, filed Writ Petition No. 4700 of 1984 and that is also posted along with Writ Appeal No. 171 of 1985.

(3.) The common questions that arise in both these matters are as follows :