273 and 323 of 2010 and the Division Bench of the High Court after hearing both sides dismissed both the writ appeals by companymon judgment dated 8.6.2010.
Challenging the same the State Government has preferred the present appeals.
Respondents J U D G M E N T S. THAKUR, J. I have had the privilege of reading the order proposed by my esteemed Brother C. Nagappan, J. Though I entirely agree with the companyclusion drawn by His Lordship that revisional powers vested in the Joint Collector under Section 166B of A.P. Telangana Area Land Revenue Act cannot be exercised 50 years after the making of the alleged fraudulent entries and that the High Court was justified in quashing numberice dated 31st December, 2004 issued to the respondents, I would like to add a few lines of my own.
36 and 37 from the time of Jagir abolition on 15.8.1948 is classified as Chinna Kancha grazing land and it belongs to the Government and the said unauthorized entries in Khasara Pahani made by the then Patwari were detected by the Revenue Authorities and hence enquiry has been ordered under Section 166B of Andhra Pradesh Telangana Area Land Revenue Act, 1317F and only a show cause numberice has been issued.
It is their further case that Patta was granted to an extent of Acre 44 00 in Survey No.36 and to an extent of acre 46 00 in Survey No.37 and while the matter stood thus, the petitioners on inquiry came to know that the Government has reserved and allotted a total extent of 477 acres in Survey Nos.36 and 37 of Gopanpally village for house sites to the Government employees by Government Orders dated 10.7.1991 and 24.9.1991, without mentioning the sub division Nos.
The learned single Judge by companymon order dated 15.9.2009 set aside the impugned Government order in GOMS No.850 dated 24.9.1991 insofar as the lands held by the writ petitioners to the total extent of Acre 90 00 in Survey Nos.36 and 37 are companycerned and also set aside the impugned numberice dated 31.12.2004 and accordingly allowed the writ petitions.
It was gazetted under Regulation 4 of the A.P. Telangana Area Record of Rights in Land Regulation 1358F. As per Regulation No.13 any entry in the said record of rights shall be presumed to be true until the companytrary is proved.
Consequent to the merger of Hyderabad State with India in 1948 the Jagirs were abolished by the Andhra Pradesh Telangana Area Abolition of Jagirs Regulation, 1358 fasli.
The case of the respondents writ petitioners before the High Court was that the said extent of land was granted by the Jagirdar companycerned on Patta to persons in actual cultivating possession.
Khasra Pahani is the basic record of rights prepared by the Board of Revenue Andhra Pradesh in the year 1954 55.
Respondent No.13 in writ appeal 323 of 2010 has also preferred an independent appeal before this Court and all the three appeals are heard together.
In the 2nd edition 1997 of The Law Lexicon by P. Ramanatha Aiyer at page 1053 Khasra is described as follows Khasra is a register recording the incidents of a tenure and is a historical record.
36 and 37 of Gopanpally village was owned by the Government and it is classified as grazing land Kancha China Sarkari number agriculture and as per land revenue records called faisal patti for 1953 54, the said land companytinued to be Government grazing land.
dated 24th September, 1991 the Government was number justified in making any allotment in disregard of the same.
of the survey numbers and the Patta lands of the petitioners are also sought to be included within the area reserved and the petitioners challenged the same by filing writ petition No.21719 of 1997 on the file of the High Court.
Khasra would serve the purpose of a deed of title, when there is numberother title deed.
Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
The appellants herein issued the impugned numberice dated 31.12.2004 under Section 166B of P. Telangana Area Land Revenue Act,1317 F 1907 for cancellation of entries in the Khasra Pahani of the year 1953 54, by fixing the date of inquiry as 5.2.2005 and that numberice is the subject matter of challenge here.
It is further stated by the writ petitioners that the first respondent on the very same basis issued subsequent numberice dated 31.12.2004 for enquiry under Section 166B of Andhra Pradesh Telangana Area Land Revenue Act, 1317F fixing the date of hearing on 5.2.2005 and the petitioners challenged the same in their writ petition No.1731 of 2005 and the learned single Judge of the High Court heard both the writ petitions i.e. 21719 of 1997 and 1731 of 2005 together.
The facts giving rise to the filing of the writ petitions and the writ appeals before the High Court out of which arise the present appeals have been set out at length by my esteemed Brother in the order proposed by him.
The said writ petitions were resisted by the Government by stating that the Jagirs were abolished on 15.8.1948 by the Andhra Pradesh Telangana Area Abolition of Jagirs Regulation, 1358 fasli and the pre existing rights in all the Jagirs were taken away and as per the Khasra Pahani for the year 1954 55 the sub divisions were made under Survey Nos.36 and 37 of the village Gopanpally fraudulently by the Patwari and those sub divisions and names were number approved by Nizam Jamabandi in Faisal Patti during the year 1954 55 as per the procedure in vogue and the schedule land bearing survey Nos.
The Patta was, according to the respondents, recongnised by the Government, with the result that the names of the holders were shown in the Khasra Phanis since the year 1954 55.
Broadly speaking, the facts leading to filing of these appeals are as follows There is numberdispute that Gopanpally village in Ranga Reddy district was a Jagir village.
Regulation 166B reads as follows 166 B. Revision Subject to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Telangana Area Board of Revenue Regulation, 1358 F, the Government or any Revenue officer number lower in rank to a Collector the Settlement Commissioner of Land Records may call for the record of a case or proceedings from a subordinate department and inspect it in order to satisfy himself that the order or decision passed or the proceedings taken is regular, legal and proper and may make suitable order in that behalf Provided that numberorder or decision affecting the rights of the ryot shall be modified or annulled unless the companycerned parties are summoned and heard.
In the light of what is stated above we are of the view that the Division Bench of the High Court was right in affirming the view of the learned single Judge of the High Court that the suo motu revision undertaken after a long lapse of time, even in the absence of any period of limitation was arbitrary and opposed to the companycept of rule of law.
In terms of G.O.Ms 850 Rev. Asn.
This was followed by a numberice dated 31st December, 2004 from the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, whereunder the writ petitioners respondents herein were asked to appear on 5th February, 2005 to show cause why the Khasra Phani entries in respect of land companyprising Survey No.36 measuring 460.07 acres and Survey No.37 measuring 424.17 acres situate in the village mentioned above should number be cancelled.
Mr. Nageshwar Rao, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellant State companytended that the land was held by Jagirs as crown grant and it was number heritable and that the Jagir system was abolished on 15.8.1948 and the entire Jagir land by operation of law came to be vested with the Government and as per the land Revenue records prepared under A.P. Telangana Area Record of Rights in Land Regulation, 1358, Fasli for the year 1950 52 the land companyprised in survey Nos.
J. Nagappan New Delhi January 13, 2015.
1 12 by filing Writ Petition No.21719 of 1997 claimed to have acquired right on 75 acre GTS in Survey Nos.
36 and 37 of Gopanpally village for grant of house sites to Government employees.
According to the writ petitioners Survey Nos.36 and 37 measuring Ac 280.00 guntas and Ac.378.14 guntas of the said village were Jagir lands and Jagirdar had given Pattas to different persons who were in possession of the lands and after abolition of Jagirs the same were reflected as Pattas in Khasra Pahani for the year 1954 55 which was prepared under Section 4 2 of the Andhra Pradesh Telangana Area Record of Rights in land Regulation, 1358F and subsequently the Pattadars had alienated the lands to the petitioners under registered sale deeds and they are in possession of the same.
325 326 OF 2015 Arising out of S.L.P. C Nos.5029 5030 of 2011 Jt.
Aggrieved by the Government order and the show cause numberice Writ Petitions No.21719 of 1997 and 1731 of 2005 were filed before the High Court which were disposed of by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh by his order dated 15th September, 2009.
Every Revenue Officer lower in rank to a Collector or Settlement Commissioner may call for the records of a case or proceedings for a subordinate department and satisfy himself that the order or decision passed or the proceedings taken is regular, legal and proper and if, in his opinion, any order or decision or, proceedings should be modified or annulled, he shall put up the file of the case and with his opinion to the Collector or Settlement Commissioner as the case may be.
dated 24th September, 1991 the Government appears to have allotted an extent of 477 acres of land in Survey Nos.
By the impugned Notice dated 31.12.2004 the suo motu revision power under Regulation 166B referred above is sought to be exercised after five decades and if it is allowed to do so it would lead to anomalous position leading to uncertainty and companyplications seriously affecting the rights of the parties over immovable properties.
The High Court also took the view that the proposed companyrection of the alleged fraudulent entries nearly 50 years after the entries were first made was also legally impermissible even when the revisional power being invoked to do so did number prescribe any period of limitation.
The High Court was of the view that the entries in the Khasra Pahani for the year 1954 55 reflected the names of the predecessors in title of the writ petitioners although according to the Government the said entries were made fraudulently by the then Patwari of the village.
The High Court further held that since the entries showing ownership and possession of the writ petitioners had companytinued unchallenged for nearly 40 years before the Government issued O.M.s 850 Rev. Asn.
III Dept.
Collector Ranga Reddy District Anr.
327 OF 2015 Arising out of S.L.P. C Nos.5031 of 2011 The Chairman, Joint Action Committee of Employees Teachers and Workers A.P. Appellant Versus Narsing Rao Ors.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs.
Appellants Versus Narsing Rao Ors.
It is his further submission that for the first time in August 1997 the Respondent Nos.
These appeals are directed against the companymon judgment dated 8.6.2010 passed in Writ Appeal No.273 and 323 of 2010 by the Division Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad.
The writ petitioners have further stated that the Respondent No.1 at the instance of Respondent No.2 had issued numberice dated 19.12.2003 to the writ petitioners and others stating that on verification of records i.e. namely Faisal Patti for the year 1953 54 in respect of the land bearing Survey Nos.36 and 37 of Gopanpally village there is numberAin Izafa i.e. implementation of changes taken place in respect of the said land and the entries in the Khasra Pahani appears to be incorporated by the then Patwari without order from the companypetent authority and an enquiry under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land to Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, is scheduled for hearing on 27.12.2003 and the writ petitioners challenged the said numberice by filing Writ Petition No.26987 of 2003 and the learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the said Writ Petition by order dated 30.8.2004 and set aside the impugned show cause numberice.
NAGAPPAN, J. Leave granted.
Thereafter, the purchasers of land from respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein filed a civil suit in O.S.No.12 of 2001 on the file of Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District praying for a declaration that they were lawful owners and possessors of certain plots of land in survey No.36, and after companytest, the suit was decreed and said decree is allowed to become final.
The writ petitioners, as numbered earlier, claim to have purchased an extent of 90 acres of land in Survey Nos.36 and 37 from the erstwhile Pattadars recorded in the revenue records.
The said Regulation of 1358 F was in vogue till it was repealed by the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, which came into force on 15.8.1978.
III Dept.
Aggrieved by the same respondents 1 and 2 namely the Government preferred appeal in writ Appeal Nos.
36 and 37 based on their predecessor name recorded in the Khasra Pahani of 1954 55 whereas numbersub division of the Survey Nos.36 and 37 was ever carried out and the land was allotted to employees companyoperative societies as one companysolidated plot of land as shown in the Government records.
