Shaik Sabhiha Zareen Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly^{oneinthenature} of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the rejection of the application NLCR 250108069538 Dated.08-01-2025, of the petitioner submitted for Land Conversion, by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, without any authority and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to consider the application NLCR250108069538 Dated.

¶18

without reference to the NOC of Department of Mines and ^8-01-2025 0^6l5gy. i f:

¶19

: 1 OF 2025

¶20

'' Petition under Section 1 s'TCPC praying that in^{thecircumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,^{theHighCourtmaybepleasedto} NLCR direct the 3rd respondent to consider the application vide 250108069538 Dated; 08-01-2025 submitted by the petitioner for land Conversion without reference to the NOC of Department of Mines and Geology pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶21

" Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P GANGA RAMI REDDY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made the following order:

¶24

APHC010056582025

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶26

[3329]

¶27

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUStiCE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 3164/2025

¶32

Between:

¶33

1.SHAIK SABHIHA ZAREEN, S/0. M RIYAZ, AGED ABOUT 41^YEARS, R/0 D.N0.11-3B, FORT STREET, MADANAPALLE TOWN AND MANDAL ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

¶34

...PETITIONER

¶35

AND

¶36

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶37

2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, RAYACHOTY, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

¶38

3.THESUBCOLLECTOR, MADANAPALLE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

¶39

MADANAPALLE MANDAL,

¶40

4.THE TAHSILDAR, MADANAPALLE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT

¶41

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶42

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India^{prayingthatinthe} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{theHighCourtmaybe} pleased toPleased to issue a Writ, order or direction^{moreparticularlyonein} the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the rejection^{oftheapplication}

¶43

2

¶44

NLCR 250108069538 Dated.08-01-2025, of the petitioner submitted for Land Conversion, by the 3rd respondent asillegal, arbitrary, without any authority andin violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the 3 respondent to consider the application NLCR250108069538 Dated.08012025 without reference to the NOC of Department of Mines and Geology and pass

¶45

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶46

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 Pleased to direct the 3rd respondent to consider the application vide NLCR 250108069538 Dated: 08-01-2025 submitted by the petitioner[ for land Conversion without reference to the NOC of Department of Mines and Geology pending disposal of the above writ petition^and pass

¶47

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶48

1.P GANGA RAMI REDDY

¶49

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶50

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶51

The Court made the following:

¶52

3

¶53

THE

¶54

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIWIMAGADDA

¶55

\A/PIT PFTITION NO: 3164/2025

¶56

ORDER:

¶57

is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India This Writ Petition is seeking the following relief;

¶58

direction more particularly Pleased to issue a Writ, order or of Mandamus, declaring the rejection of the one in the nature of Writ 250108069538 Dated:08-01-2025, of the petitioner application NLCR submitted for Land Conversion, by the ^ respondent as illegal, violation of Principles of Natural arbitrary, without any authority and in direct the 3"^ respondent to consider the Justice and consequently NLCR250108069538 Dated 08-01-2025 without reference application to the NOC of Department of Mines and Geology and pass and the learned Assistant 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶59

submits that the petitioner is the 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner extent of Ac.0.59 of land admeasuring to an absolute owner and possessor Revenue Village, Madanapalle Mandal. cents in Sy.No.71/2, Venkappakota The same was acquired by the petitioner through a registered sale deed 25.08.2021. Accordingly, the Document No.8501/2021, dated bearing records pertaining to the petitioner’s name was duly mutated in the revenue of converting the said land from said land. It is submitted that for the purpose agricultural to nonagricultural land, the petitioner submitted an application

¶60

4

¶61

under Section 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006, the said application was assigned number vide NLCR250108069538, dated 08.01.2025, and placed before the 3”^^ respondent and also paid the requisite land conversion tax/fee to the Government for such conversion. However, despite the payment and submission, the 3^'^ respondent rejected the application without assigning any reasons. Hence, this writ petition

¶62

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the rejection of the application by the 3'"'^ respondent appears to have been made without assigning any reasons, thereby not adhering to the principles of natural justice. The learned Assistant Government Pleader also assures that the competent authority i.e.. the Revenue Divisional Officer, will visit again the cause of the petitioner, and subject land and pass appropriate orders in accordance^withthelaw.

¶63

Having regard to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents and on perusal of the material available on record, it is a fact that the subject land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.59 cents in Sy.No.71/2,^{whichconstitutesa} part of the total extent of land of Ac.2.40 cents in the same survey number. The petitioner acquired the subject land through a registered sale deed bearing Document No.8501/2021, dated 25.08.2021. Consequently, the

¶64

5

¶65

petitioner's name was duly mutated in the revenue records^{pertainingtothe} said land.

¶66

It is observed that the total land admeasuring to an^{extentofAc.2.40} cents, including the petitioner’s subject land to an^{extentofAc.0.59centsin} Sy.No.71/2 was originally assigned to an ex-serviceman by the Tahsildar, Madanapalle vide AM No.72/4/1416,^dated 20.01.2007, with the condition that the assignment being transferable/alienable to third parties as per the^{conditionsstipulatedinthe} assignment patta. Consequently, the petitioner acquired^{absoluteownership} rights over the subject property under a registered sale deed dated 25.08.2021. As contended by the learned counsel for^{thepetitioner,} it appears that the subject property is a freehold property, and^{thepetitionerpossesses} absolute rights over the land. Therefore, the petitioners^{applicationdated} 08.01.2025, submitted for the conversion of the subject land into nonagricultural land under the provisions of the Andhra^{PradeshAgriculturalLand} (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006, is liable to be considered. The impugned rejection of the said application^{wasmadewithout} assigning any reasons, without issuing any prior notice,^{whichisinviolationof} the principles of natural justice apart from violation of principles of reasonableness. Furthermore, the due procedure as contemplated^underthe

¶67

6 .

¶68

%

¶69

Act was not followed, which render the action of rejection as illegal and sustainable.

¶70

As reasons explained above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by setting aside the order of rejection, without assigning any reasons, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice and non-observation of due procedure of law. However, the matter is remanded to the 3’’^ respondent for reconsideration of the petitioner’s claim within a reasonable time i.e., not later than three (03) months from fhe date of receipt of a copy of this order by adhering to the principles as indicated above and in accordance with the law.

¶71