P GOPAL REDDY Vs. MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER TIRUPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An extent of Ac. 2-89 cents of Government dry land in S. No. 559/1 situated in Peruru village, now part of Urban area of Tirupathi Municipality was assigned to the petitioner on May 10, 1955. On June 14, 1985, he sold the land with false recital that it is not an assigned land for consideration of Rs. 29,000/- to one S. Gunabhushana Naidu, who made 32 plots for sale and sought approval of lay out from the 2nd respondent - Urban Development Authority, Tirupathi. The first respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner and cancelled the assignment by an order made under Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act (9 of 1977), for short, "the Act". The alienee filed W.P.No. 9253/86 which was allowed by this Court on July 24, 1986 and directed to issue notice to the petitioner as well as the alienee. Pursuant thereto, after due notices to the petitioner as well as the assignee, by proceedings dated September 8, 1986, the first respondent declared the transfer as null and void and he resumed the land and at the behest of the Collector, it was assigned to the second respondent. The alienee allowed the order to become final. The petitioner has filed this writ petition without challenging the cancellation, only for a declaration that the resumption and assignment of the land to the 2nd respondent is contrary to Section 4 of the Act, violating his fundamental right to equality enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution, with a direcction to restitute possession of the land to the petitioner. Sri S. Venkata Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the stand of the petitioner with all due vehemence.

(2.) Despite adjourning the case thrice to enable Sri Gopal Rao, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent to ascertain as to for what purpose the land in question is proposed to be put to, neither a counter-affidavit was filed nor instructions have been issued by the 2nd respondent.

(3.) Section 3 of the Act prohibits transfer of assigned land and subsection (3) thereof declares that "any transfer or acquisition made in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) "shall be deemed to be null and void". Therefore, any transfer whether before or after the commencement of the Act of the assigned land to a landless poor person "for the purpose of cultivation or as a house-site", shall be null and void. Thereby, the transferee acquires no right, title and interest in |the assigned land under a void transfer by way of sale, gift, exchange, mortgage with or without possession, lease, charge or any other transfer in relation to the assigned land. The only exception engrafted is testamantaiy disposition. The consequences thereof are : Under sub-section (5) of Section 3, if the alienee himself is a landless poor and purchased the land in good faith and for valuable consideration from the assignee and is in possession of such land "for purpose of cultivation or as a house site", then alone he may be allowed to retain possession of the land. Otherwise, under Section 4 thereof the Collector or any authorised officer (noc below the rank of Tahsildar) may take possession of the land after evicting the person in possession in the prescribed manner: What is to be done thereafter is adumbrated in Clause (b) thereof, which is material for the purpose of this case, thus : "restore the assigned land to the original assignee or his legal heir, or where it is not reasonably practicable to restore the land to such assignee or legal heir, resume the assigned land to Government for assignment to landless poor persons in accordance with the rules for the time being in force ; Provided that the assigned land shall not be restored to the original assignee or his legal heir more then once, and in case the original assignee or his legal heir transfers the assigned land again after such restoration, it shall be resumed to the Government for assignment 'to any other landless poor person". (Emphasis supplied) (The other sub-sections are not relevant. Hence omitted). The legislative animation, thereby, manifests that on satisfying that the transfer of assigned land has been made in contravention of Section 3 (1) or (2), the Collector or authorised person, not below the rank of a Tahsildar, pass an order accordingly ; after evicting the person in possession in the prescribed manner, take possession of the assigned land and restore the assigned land to the original assignee or his legal heir. It is a mandatory requirement of the law. When it is not reasonably practicable to restore the land to such assignee or legal heir, resume the land to Government and "assign the same to landless poor persons in accordance with the rules in vogue" for the purpose of cultivation or house site, "if the original assignment itself is for house site". In case the assignee or the legal heir contravenes once again after restoration, in the mandatory language, "it shall be resumed to the Government for assignment to any other landless poor person."