From the Judgments and Orders dated the 6 7 77, 19.12.77, 20.12.77, 20 4 78, 28 2 78, 4 7 79, 8 6 78, 7 7 78, 12 7 78, 9 8 79, 18 1 78 and 13 10 77 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Civil Revision Petition Nos.
It will suffice to refer to the facts of Special Leave Petition No.
Effective steps for implementation of the Act companyld number, however, be taken till the 1st of January, 1975.
Shri M.N. Phadke appearing for the petitioners has raised the following companytentions A separated minor son is number a member of the family unit and, therefore, his property cannot be tagged with that of his father.
The petitioners have number filed the special leave petition to challenge the order of the High Court.
The ground of discrimination under Article 14 was, however, negatived by the Court.
1991/76 403/77, 1612/77, 1268 1275/77, 4436/77, 2571/77, 7175/78, 7174/78, 70 1907/78, 564/78, 1036 1126/78, 1686/79, 1387/77 and 2677 of 1977 WITH Writ Petition No.
On 12th of June 1970 the first petitioner sold an area of 22.63 acres of Pangidigudem village to one B. Appa Rao under sale agreement Ext.
On 10th of April 1970 he sold an area of 10.22 acres and 10.00 acres of village Pangidigudem under sale agreement Ext.
Before dealing with the points raised by the learned companynsel for the petitioners it may be pointed out that the Andhra Pradesh Act was enacted by the Andhra Pradesh Legislature on 1st of January, 1973.
On 10th January 1970 the third petitioner sold an area of 12.00 acres of Pangidigudem village to P. Pattabhi.
They have, therefore, in their written arguments sought permission to withdraw the said companytention for the present with liberty to raise the same before the appropriate authority whenever the said numberification is available.
A 9, for Rs.
The petitioners filed an appeal before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal.
1671, 2631, 3322 23, 3904, 4418, 9796, 9127 of 1979, 6639 40, 6794, 5121 22 of 1978, 10403 of 1979, 3797 of 1980.
One of the grounds taken was that by reason of enactment of the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 hereinafter referred to as the Central Act the Andhra Pradesh Act had become void and inoperative.
The Andhra Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Amendment Act, 1977 was enacted with retrospective effect from 1st January, 1975 which introduced s. 4 A among other provisions.
The other ground taken in those cases was that the definition of family unit was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
The petitioners still feeling aggrieved filed a revision to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
Some of the plots fall in drought prone area and, therefore, the petitioner should have got an advantage of twelve and a half per cent.
4789 of 1982 AND Writ Petition No.
Land transferred by the petitioners under various transfer deeds to outsiders and who came in possession also companyld number be included in the holding of the petitioners.
The definition of family unit under s. 3 f as interpreted by the High Court is also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
6794 of 1978, Chinnam Nagabhushnam and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh to bring out the points of companytroversy in these cases.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Special Leave Petition Civil Nos.
Accordingly, on 27th of September, 1976 the Tribunal declared that the family unit was in possession of excess land over the ceiling limit.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MISRA J. This batch of special leave petitions and writ petitions arising out of proceedings under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 hereinafter referred to as the Andhra Pradesh Act is directed against the judgments of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and raise companymon questions of law.
Again on 16th of June 1970 the third petitioner sold an area of 8.00 acres of Pangidigudem village to B. Balaram Singh under sale agreement Ext.
The first petitioner and the third petitioner partitioned their property by metes and bounds by virtue of a registered partition deed dated 12th of April 1960 and since then they are in separate possession of the land falling in their respective shares.
The High Court dismissed the same on 7th of July, 1978.
The Appellate Tribunal, in its turn, allowed the appeal in part.
By a second partition deed dated 11th of April, 1969 the first petitioner and the second petitioner further partitioned the properties that fell to the share of the first petitioner in the first partition between themselves.
As soon as the amending Act was passed another round of litigation was started by the land holders by filing writ petitions in this Court challenging again the companystitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh Act.
The Andhra Pradesh Act came into force on 1st of January 1975 by virtue of a numberification issued by the State Government.
80,000 to G. Veeraju and the vendee was put in possession.
Soon after, its companystitutional validity was challenged before the Andhra Pradesh High Court on various grounds but a Full Bench of the High Court negatived the challenge and held the Act to be companystitutionally valid on 11th of April, 1973.
