WA/1822/2008 of Palla Ramachandra Rao Vs Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam (Rural) Chinna Gadiri on 31 December 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMAand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH

WRIT APPEAL No.1822 of 2008

(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated25/11/2008 in WP NO : 10204 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.)

Between:

1 Palla Ramachandra Rao S/o. Palla Appa Narasaiah R./o. Ramajogipet, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

2 Palla Suryaprakash Rao S/o. Late Appa Narasaiah R./o. Ramajogipet, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.3 Palla Venugopal Rao S/o. Late Appa Rao R./o. Ramajogipet, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.4 Palla Ranganayakulu S/o. Late Venkaiah R/o. 50-74-5/1, Ganeshnagar, Seethammapeta, Visakhapatnam,Visakhapatnam District.5 Palla Jagannadha Rao S/o.Late Poli Naidu R/o. D.No.14-14-5, Ramajogipeta, Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.6 Palla Appala Raju S/o.Late Poli Naidu R/o. D.No.14-14-5, Ramajogipeta, Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.7 Palla Chalapathi Rao S/o.Late Poli Naidu R/o. D.No.14-14-5, Ramajogipeta, Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.8 Palla Tirumala Rao S/o.Late Appa Rao R/o. D.No.14-11-7/A, Ramajogipeta, Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.9 Palla Ramana Murthy S/o. Late Appa Rao R/o. D.No.14-11-7/A,, Ramajogipeta, Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.10 Palla Viswanadham S/o. Late Appa Rao R/o. D.No.14-11-7/A,, Ramajogipeta, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

11 Palla Krishna Murthy S/o. Late Appa Rao R/o. D.No.14-11-7/A,, Ramajogipeta, Visakhapatnam, VisakhapatnamDistrict.

12 Palla Krishna Mohan S/o. late Atchyuta Narayana R/o. Flat No. 106, Gajanda Fort, Sanjeeva Nagar, NAD Kotta Road, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

13 Palla Srinivas Rao S/o. late Atchyuta Narayana R/o. Flat No. 106, Gajanda Fort, Sanjeeva Nagar, NAD Kotta Road, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

14 Palla Madusudhan Rao S/o. late Atchyuta Narayana R/o. Flat No. 106, Gajanda Fort, Sanjeeva Nagar, NAD Kotta Road, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

15 Palla Rajendra Kumar S/o. late Atchyuta Narayana R/o. Flat No.106, Gajanda Fort, Sanjeeva Nagar, (All The petitioners are Rep. by their GPA Holder Sri Datla VenkataKrishna Raju S/o.Late Suryanarayana Raju aged 56 years, Business, R/o. B-2, Seasurf Aprtments, Duch HouseLayout, Visakhapatham-17)

..... APPELLANT(S)

AND

Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam (Rural) Chinna Gadiri Visakhapatnam,Visakhapatnam District.

.....RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Appellant : MR.D.V.SITARAMAMURTHY

Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following :

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R. VARMAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH

ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma)

Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as thelearned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent.

2. This writ appeal is directed against the order, dated 25-11-2008, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court inW.P.No.10204 of 2008.

3. Appellants are petitioners and respondent is respondent in thewrit petition.

4. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment, the partieswill be referred to as per their array in the writ petition.

5. The whole dispute is with regard to granting of ryowari patta overa total extent of land admeasuring Acs.32-00 situated in original SurveyNo.389 (new R.S.No.346) of Thimmapuram village, MadhurawadaMandal, Vizianagaram District. It appears that in the enquiry conductedunder Section 11 (a) of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolitionand Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (for brevity “the Act”), thepetitioners succeeded in respect of the land in an extent of Acs.19.65cents and ryotwari patta has been granted in favour of the petitioners. Sofar as remaining extent of Acs.12.35 cents is concerned, they wereunsuccessful. As a result of the same, both the petitioners as well as therespondent approached the Director of Settlements, by way of filingappeals and the same are pending before the said authority.

6. When the respondent interfered with the fencing work undertakenby the petitioners in respect of Acs.19.65 cents of land, to which they weregranted patta, the petitioners filed W.P.No.10204 of 2008. The learnedsingle Judge, through the impugned order, dated 25-11-2008, dismissedthe said writ petition. Hence, the present writ appeal.

7. Now, the dispute is as to whether the petitioners can be permittedto protect the land in respect of Acs.19.65 cents by way of fencing.

8. It is needless to say that in the statutory enquiry conducted underSection 11 (a) of the Act, patta has been granted in favour of thepetitioners in respect of Acs.19.65 cents and, of course, the same is underchallenge in an appeal preferred by the respondent before the Director ofSettlements. It also appears that when some third parties tried to interferewith the said land, a suit O.S.No.298 of 2007 was filed and interiminjunction also was obtained by the petitioners.

9. Therefore, it is the apprehension of the learned counsel for thepetitioners that if the land, to which patta has been granted to thepetitioners, is not protected, further encroachments may take place byvarious other persons and it is not possible for them to approach the CivilCourt every time.

10. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader forRevenue vehemently contended that there is no identification of the landin an extent of Acs.19.65 cents to which patta has been granted in favourof the petitioners and, therefore, no interim orders can be granted by thisCourt in favour of the petitioners, at this stage.

11. The contention of the learned Government Pleader cannot becountenanced for the simple reason that in the enquiry conducted underSection 11 (a) of the Act itself, an extent of Acs.19.65 cents of land towhich patta has been granted in favour of the petitioners, the land ought tohave been identified and, even otherwise also, it is not a difficult job for therespondent to identify the land in an extent of Acs.1965 cents to which thepetitioners are entitled.

12. Therefore, we feel it expedient to protect the interest of thepetitioners in whose favour patta has been granted, inasmuch as the said patta has not been cancelled and the same is very much in subsistence infavour of the petitioners.

13. Accordingly, the petitioners are permitted to fence the land in anextent of Acs.19-65 cents, to which patta has been granted to them, byway of raising a compound wall or by fencing the same with a barbed wireor in any other effective manner, subject to condition that the same shallbe removed in case of any adverse order being passed by the appellateauthority, at a later point of time.

14. It is made clear that the land so permitted to be protected by thepetitioners shall not be alienated to any third party or the nature of the saidland shall not be changed, in any manner whatsoever, pending thedecision being rendered by the appellate authority i.e., the Director ofSettlements.

15. With the above observations and directions, the writ appeal isdisposed of, at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________

JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA

__________________________

JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH

31-12-2008.Msr.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R. VARMAAND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH

31-12-2008(Msr)