Disposed

Surya Sakthi Nagar Plot and House Owner's Welfare Association, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Nov 2023WP/35752/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenged the District Collector's proceedings declaring land surplus and failure to de-notify it. The Court directed a newly constituted Committee to decide within two months, with the Collector to act within two months thereafter if the Committee fails.

What did the court decide?

Committee to act within two months; Collector to act within two months thereafter if Committee fails.

Surya Sakthi Nagar Plot and House Owner's Welfare… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE }

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 35752 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Surya Sakthi Nagar Plot and House Owner's Welfare Association, Regn. No.353 of 2017, Rep. by its President, Penumajji Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy, S/o Late Sanyasi Appadu, aged 65 years, Resident of D.No. 1-41/22, Surya Sakthi Nagar, P.M.Palem, Visakhapatnam-530041.

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue), AP Secretariat, Velagapudi at Amaravathi

¶12

The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration / Special Chief Secretary to Government, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶13

The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

¶14

The Joint Sub Registrar, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam.

¶15

The District Registrar, Registration Department, Visakhapatnam

¶16

The Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, 5-59, R.K. Spring Walley Apartments, Eedpugallu, Kankipadu Mandal, Vijayawada - 521 151 Krishna District.

¶17

Sri Krishna Mutually Aided Cooperative House Building Society Ltd., No.2442, rep. by its Secretary, R.L.Narasimha Rao, S/o.late Suryanarayana, aged 59 years, D.No.26-15-205/1, Beside Reading Room, Main Road, Visakhapatnam.

¶18

...Respondents

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in E.Office No.21506/17/E1, dated 06.03.2018 addressed by the District Collector to the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps as illegal and arbitrary, consequently to set aside the same in so far as the land in Sy.No.329 of Madhurawada Village Ac.9.18 cents covered under Layout (L.P.) No. 26/2004 (approved by Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority) in the interest of justice.

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Lo direct the 4~" and 5t" Respondents to receive and register the documents pertaining to the Sale Deeds in Sy.No.329 of Madhurawada Village Ac.9.18 cents covered under Layout (L.P.) No. 26/2004 (approved by Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority)and deliver the document after its due registration, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition in the interest of justice.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G.RAMA GOPAL

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FORSTAMPS & REGISTRATION

¶25

The Court made the following: order

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶27

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.35752 of 2022

¶29

Between:-

¶30

Surya Sakthi Nagar Plot & House Owner's Welfare Association, Rep.by its President, Penumajji Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy. .... Petitioner And

¶31

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary(Revenue), A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi & Others. Respondents

¶32

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr.G.Rama Gopal Counsel for the respondents : G.P. for Revenue

¶33

G.P. for Stamps & Registration

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue(Stamps & Registration) for the respondents.

¶36

The brief facts of the case which lead to filing of the^present Writ Petition may be stated as follows:

¶37

Originally, a Cooperative House Building Society i.e., M/s.Sri Krishna Cooperative House Building Society acquired an extent of Ac. 18.36 cents in Survey No.329 of Madhurawada Village in the year 1981 under different Sale Deeds. The said Society after making enquiries with the revenue authorities applied for approval of Lay-out to the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA), which inturn sanctioned tentative approval in Block Lay-out Plan vide BLP No.10/2000. Subsequently, after fulfilling all the conditions, VUDA sanctioned the final Lay-out plan in L.P.No.26/2004 and the same was named as'Surya Sakthi Nagar' by the Society. As per the

¶38

¶39

proceedings of L.P.No.26/2004, all the roads, parks were handed over to the then Madhurawada Grama Panchayath and the Society allotted plots to the eligible members and registered the respective plots in their favour. Some of the members have constructed houses/dwelling units by obtaining loans from the financial institutions. Subsequently, in the year 2008, the Society was converted into a Mutually Aided Cooperative House Building Society as per the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act, 1995 and a Certificate of Registration in the name of Sri Krishna Mutually Aided Co-operative House Building Society Limited^(7th respondent herein) dated 08.02.2008 was issued.

¶40

While that being the position, the 3rd respondent/District Collector sent a Notification dated 06.08.2016 notifying the land of an extent of Ac.9.18 cents in Survey No.329 of Madhurawada Village as Agricultural Land Ceiling Surplus and in such circumstances, the Plot Owners Welfare Association submitted a representation dated 19.12.2016 pursuant to which the 3rd respondent addressed a Communication dated 04.12.2017(Ex.P3) to the 6th respondent to de-notify the said extent of land from the list of prohibited properties under Section 22-A(1)(d) of the Registration Act(for short `the Act') by issuing instructions to the Joint Sub-Registrar concerned. However, the 3rd respondent thereafter issued proceedings dated 06.03.2018 whereby the 6ch respondent was asked to nullify the registrations in respect of the lands covered by Survey Nos.329, 262/4, 263/2 etc., on the premise that the same were declared as Agricultural Land Ceiling Surplus in LCC 230/1975 LRDT dated 18.09.1999. Under the said

¶41

¶42

circumstances, the petitioner-Association made representations and in view of the same, the 3rd respondent addressed a Letter dated 02.08.2018(Ex.P8) to the 1 5t and^2nd respondents seeking clarification as to whether the lands in Survey Nos.262/4, 263/2 etc., including Survey No.329 can be deleted from the list of prohibited properties issued under Section 22-A of the Act, as per the orders of the High Court in C.R.P.No.2613 of 1991 and revised 10(3) Orders dated 26.19.1992. As no further action was taken in the matter, the petitioner-Association submitted further representations by setting out all the relevant aspects with reference to C.R.P.No.2613 of 1991 and other cases and in the light of the same, the^3rd respondent addressed a detailed Communication dated 10.07.2021(Ex.P11) to the 2^nd respondent and sought suitable instructions as to whether the said lands can be deleted from the list of prohibited properties.

¶43

While things stood thus, the Government vide Memo No.REV01LANA0LAND(PM)/8/2020-LKANDS-I dated 23.03.2022, clarified that the cases for deletion from prohibitory lists, under any of the sections 22A(1)(a) to (e), shall be dealt with and disposed by Collectors in terms of the Andhra Pradesh Dotted Lands (Updation in Re-settlement Register) Act, 2017 without further reference to the CCLA or the Government. That all the pending cases at the level of the CCLA and Government shall be returned back to the Collectors for disposal accordingly. In view of the said instructions, the petitioner-Association on 19.04.2022 submitted a detailed representation seeking to de-notify the land situated in Survey No.329 and L.P.No.26/2004 of Madhurawada from the prohibited list. In response to

¶44

¶45

the same, the 3rd respondent by setting out all the relevant aspects submitted a detailed report dated 17.06.2022(Ex.P16) to the^2"d respondent soliciting suitable instructions in the matter. Thereafter, the petitioner's Association submitted another representation dated 02.07.2022(Ex.P17) to the 2^"d respondent, but the same did not yield any response. Ultimately, the petitioner-Association is constrained to file the instant Writ Petition, challenging the initial Proceedings of the^Yd respondent dated 06.03.2018.

¶46

The learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the various communications of the different District Collectors, who discharged functions and were at the helm of affairs during the relevant point of time submits that despite the detailed reports with reference to the subject matter properties, no orders for deleting the same from the list of prohibited properties have been issued so far. He submits that even as per the Government Orders, it is not in dispute that the District Collector is the competent authority to delete the properties which are placed in the prohibited category list and in such circumstances, the inaction on the part of the 3rd respondent would amount to abdication of his functions. He further submits that despite ample material on record, the^3rd respondent instead of passing orders to de-notify the subject matter land from the prohibited category list is not justified in seeking clarifications from the^2"d respondent. He submits that as no steps are being taken to revoke the Proceedings dated 06.03.2018 impugned in the Writ Petition and deleting the subject matter land from the prohibited category list, despite the

¶47

¶48

petitioner's Association numerous representations, the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶49

On the other hand, submissions were made on behalf of the official respondents by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue/Stamps & Registration with reference to instructions dated 03.11.2022 and 07.12.2022 furnished by the 3d respondent-District Collector. A reading of the instructions dated 03.11.2022 would make it clear that pursuant to the report of the 3d respondent dated 2nd 17.06.2022(Ex.P16), the respondent/CCLA vide Memo

¶50

No.REV02/41/3/2019-LR-III SEC-CCLA dated 29.08.2022 instructed the District Collector/3`d respondent to take appropriate action under the powers delegated to the District Collectors for additions/modifications/deletions of prohibited properties in Section 22(A)(1)(d). In the said instructions, it is also stated that "the matter is under active examination and suitable decision will be taken in the matter in accordance with law." However, as seen from the subsequent instructions dated 07.12.2022, it would appear that no decision was taken in the matter and it was felt appropriate to refer the same to a Special Committee constituted under G.O.Ms.No.681 Revenue (Lands-I) Department dated 18.10.2022 in respect of Visakhapatnam (covering Visakhapatnam & Anakapalii Districts) consisting of the following members:

¶51

1.Retired District Judge,

¶52

2.Retired Spl.Grade Deputy Collector,

¶53

3.Retired Assistant Director, Survey & Land Records,

¶54

4.Joint Collector of the concerned Districts,

¶55

¶56

5.Sub Collector/RDO of the concerned District,

¶57

6.A.D.Survey & Land Records of the concerned District 7.District Registrar of Registration and Stamps of the concerned District.

¶58

Apart from other things, the said instructions mentions that "the members of the Committee at Si. Nos. 1,2,3 are to be appointed by the Government to the District and after such appointments, the Committee will commence its operations and deals with the 22-A de-notification cases referred to it and offer specific recommendations in the matters." It is also stated that "the grievance of the petitioner will be considered accordingly after such examination, recommendations made by the said Committee, the suitable action will be taken in the matter."

¶59

Be that as it may. Except the above written instructions, no latest material/instructions are placed before this Court with regard to further action, if any, taken in the matter. It would appear that the appointment of all the members to the above referred Committee is not made and the said Committee is yet to start functioning. No reasons are forthcoming for the delay in this regard. Be that as it may.

¶60

This Court, having considered the submissions made and the material on record including the latest detailed report dated 17.06.2022 of the^3d respondent is of the opinion that the delay in taking action on the request of the petitioner-Association is not justified. Though as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner the District Collector is the competent authority to pass orders with regard to deletion of properties from the prohibited category list, in the light of the Government Orders vide

¶61

G.O.Ms.No.681 dated 18.10.2022 constituting a Committee referred to above, perhaps a decision has to be taken by the Committee in respect of the land in question. However, though the said G.O., was issued on 18.10.2022, the Committee has not started functioning so far, even after about an year. Under the said circumstances, this Court see justification on the part of the petitioner-Association in approaching this Court.

¶62

Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, providing that the Committee constituted under G.O.Ms.No.681 dated 18.10.2022 shall take necessary action on the petitioner's requests/representations for deletion of subject matter property from the prohibited category list, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event, the functioning of the said Committee is not happening/Committee fails to pass appropriate orders within the time stipulated by this Court, the 3rd respondent/District Collector shall take up the matter and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with Law, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of two (2) months thereafter.

¶63

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly with the above directions. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶64

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶65

SD/- S. SRINIVASA PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶66

//TRUE COPY//

¶67

SECTION OFFICER

¶68

To, 1. The Principal Secretary (Revenue), State of Andhra Pradesh, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi at Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶69

The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration / Special Chief Secretary to Government, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶70

The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

¶71

The Joint Sub Registrar, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam.

¶72

The District Registrar, Registration Department, Visakhapatnam.

¶73

The Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, 5-59, R.K. Spring Walley Apartments, Eedpugallu, Kankipadu Mandal, Vijayawada - 521 151 Krishna District.

¶74

The Secretary, Sri Krishna Mutually Aided Cooperative House Building Society Ltd., No.2442, R.L.Narasimha Rao, S/o.late Suryanarayana, aged 59 years, D.No_26-15-205/1, Beside Reading Room, Main Road, Visakhapatnam.

¶75

One CC to Sri G.Rama Gopal, Advocate [OPUC]

¶76

Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 10.Two CCs to GP for Stamps & Registration, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

1 1. Two CD Copies

RAM Q^',

HIGH COURT

DATED: 17/11/2023

ORDER

WP.No.35752 of 2022

07
* C rreEE 2013.
o f Section
' spTC►+ED

¶85

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Surya Sakthi Nagar Plot and House Owner's Welfare Association, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surya Sakthi Nagar Plot and House Owner's Welfare Association, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kuna Naga Venkata Tulasi Das Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

K.M. Abdul Hafeez Khan Vs Sri P.Arunbabu,Ias

Kollimi Alla Bakhash Vs Sri.Nishanth Reddy

R Manikya Reddy Vs the State of Ap

Modalavalasa Neelaveni Vs the State of Ap

Indhukuri Murali Krishnam Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh