GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. K VENKATESWARA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cause shown for restoration of the appeal is sufficient. Application is allowed. The appeal is heard on merits.

(2.) The only question raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the High Court could not have given a finding that the land in dispute is an agricultural land and does not fall within the ambit of 'urban land' as defined under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(3.) The question arises in view of the following facts: The writ petitioner- respondent claiming to be owner of certain extent of the agricultural land approached the authority under the Act for permission to alienate the land. The authority passed an order dated 23-4-1997 rejecting the application to issue permission saying that the writ petitioner-respondent has not filed declaration under Section 6 (1) of the Act. The writ petitioner-respondent preferred an appeal against the said order inter alia contending that the land does not fall within the definition of 'urban land' under the Act; consequently, no directions can be given to him to file any declaration under Section 6 (1) of the Act. The Commissioner of Land Reforms & Urban Land Ceilings dismissed the appeal. The writ petitioner-respondent, ignoring the order of the appellate authority, submitted the document of sale to the Sub-Registrar for registration inter alia contending that no certificate from the authority under the Act is required for registration of the document. The District Registrar sought clarification from the authorities under the Act and the writ petitioner has also filed representation for giving direction to the Special Officer and Competent Authority to give clarification sought by the Registration Department. The authority found that the writ petitioner-respondent is holding the land and sold certain land on various dates. It was observed that Poranki village is not covered under the Master Plan but it is partly covered under the urban agglomeration i.e., R.S.Nos. 302/5 to 490 and peripheral area of Vijayawada urban agglomeration. Thus the writ petitioner-respondent is required to file a declaration under Section 6 (1) of the Act as held by the Commissioner to enable the Special Officer and Competent Authority to decide the case with reference to the Act and the decisions of the Supreme Court of India, and it was observed," issue of no objection certificate to sell the lands nor the issuance of declaration did not arise at this stage."