The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a request to convert assigned agricultural land into house sites. The Court held that willful non-cultivation of assigned land meant the refusal did not violate any fundamental rights.
Writ petition dismissed; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU
WRIT PETITION NO : 8327 of 1999
Between:
C. Balakrishna S/o late Sri Gurappa R/o 220, Bestha Street, Tirupathi
... PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any Writ, Direction, Order or preferably in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling of records in Roc.No.E4/17213/98, dt: 22-3-1999 on the file of the District Collector, Chittoor, and quash the same and pass such other orders as may be just.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRINIVAS REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: G.P for Assignment
The Court made the following :
ORDER:
Petitioner, who was assigned Ac.5.30 cents of land under normal DKT rules, filed an application before the Tirupathi Urban Development Authorities (for short “TUDA”) seeking permission to convert the said land into house sites and sought for approval. The TUDA authorities rejected the application holding that transfer of DKT lands would be in contravention of conditions of assignment. Aggrieved by the said proceedings, petitioner filed W.P.No.4176 of 1989, which was disposed of by the order dated 26.3.1997 directing the Collector to make an enquiry as to whether the land, by operation of law or any other regulation, has been reserved for any nonagricultural purpose and as to whether it has become impossible to cultivate the land for its being used for agricultural purpose, and directed the authorities of TUDA to take necessary action after receipt of information from the Collector.
2. In pursuance of the directions given by this Court, the District Revenue Officer, Chittor made an inspection of the lands and reported that the lands are under effective cultivation and there is no slightest inconvenience for the petitioner for carrying on agricultural operations over the land and the petitioner has willfully stopped cultivation of the said land. Therefore, the Vice Chairman, TUDA after
receipt of information from the Collector issued an endorsement to the petitioner rejecting his application and the same was communicated to the petitioner.
Questioning the said communication, petitioner filed this petition.
3. Since the petitioner seems to have stopped cultivation willfully and deliberately and since the land is an assigned land, refusal of the request of the petitioner to convert the land assigned to him for cultivation, as house plots and to alienate them to third parties, cannot be said to be a violation of any of the fundamental rights of
the petitioner.
4. Hence the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. The writ petition is dismissed. No
costs.
C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J
Dated : 11.3.2005
RAR
To
3 2 CCs to G.P for Assignment, High Court Bldgs,Hyd.(OUT)
4 2 CD copies.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether refusal of request to convert assigned agricultural land for house plots violates fundamental rights.
Whether petitioner is entitled to relief challenging rejection of land conversion application.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
C. Balakrishna
District Collector, Chittoor
Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupathi (Urban)
C.Y.SOMAYAJULU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
