THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Writ Petition No.9772 of 2020

ORDER:

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed, to issue Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner from his land to an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Survey No.327/2A of Kakallapalli Village, Ananthapuram Mandal, Ananthapur District, without any notice or following the procedure under the Act, which is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, contrary to the Act and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents herein not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that D-Form Patta was issued in favour of father of this petitioner i.e., B.Subbanna assigning an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Survey No.327/2A of Kakallapalli village of Ananthapuram Mandal, Ananthapuram District by the then Mandal Revenue Officer, Anthapuram. Father of this petitioner was in possession and enjoyment of the said property during his life time and died intestate leaving the petitioner, who in turn succeeded the estate of his father. From the date of death of his father, the petitioner is continuing to cultivate his land and his name is mutated in ROR, 1B Register and other revenue records. While the matter stood thus, the respondents are trying to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property without any manner of right and trying to dispossess the petitioner though the petitioner is a land less poor person, having no other property for his livelihood and thereby the action of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary and requested to issue a direction.

3. During the course of hearing the respondents did not file any counter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri K.Srinivas reiterating the contents of the petition affidavit stating that the petitioner has authorized document including D-Form Patta and Adangal copies issued by the Tahsildar including the Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed to establish that this land was the land of the petitioner and the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property as on date after death of his father.

5. Whereas Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the land was sub divided and the land in Survey No.327/2A of Kakallapalli village of Ananthapuram District was assigned to A.Kondamma vide R.Dis No.803/17 and since then she is in possession and enjoyment of the property, being the beneficiary under the D-Form Patta, therefore the petitioner is no way concerned with the property in dispute and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

6. As the petitioner contending that this property was assigned to his father in Survey No.327/2A by way of D-Form Patta, as seen from D-Form Patta in D.A.Dis No.51/90 an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Survey No.327/3 was assigned in favour of Boya Subbanna father of this petitioner. But in a subsequent document i.e., Form 1B the name of this petitioner was shown as pattadar i.e., Boya Ramakrishna, S/o.Subbanna in column No.12 and 13 in Pattadar Adangal for the land in Survey No.327/2A and similarly in Form 1B also the name of the petitioner was shown as pattadar by succession. Similarly in the adangals for the fasli 1427 the name of the petitioner was shown as pattadar for the land in Survey No.327/2A for an extent of Ac.2.50 cents and it was inherited by the petitioner, the Pattadar pass book was also issued where the survey number is mentioned as 327/2A for an extent of Ac.2.50 cents. Thus the material and the documents produced before this court issued by Tahsildar clinchingly established that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the land in Survey No.327/2A in an extent of Ac.2.50 cents, though the discripancy regarding survey number is not a ground since the petitioner prima facie established that he is in possession of land in an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in

2

Survey No.327/2A which is classified as drainage. Therefore, I find that this petitioner is in prima facie possession and enjoyment of land in an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Survey No.327/2A of Kakallapalli village, Ananthapuram Mandal, Ananthapuram District whether he is a rightful owner or wrongful owner, this court cannot decide such disputed fact, except finding prima facie possession without deciding title to the property when the petitioner is able to establish that he is in possession and enjoyment of the property of an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Survey No.327/2A is entitled to a protection from the Court as it cannot be evicted from the land except by due process of law, in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs v. M.Varadappa Naidu (dead) by L.Rs1.

7. Hence, having considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I will find that it is a fit case to direct the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Survey No.327/2A of Kakallapalli Village, Ananthapuram Mandal, Ananthapuram District except by due process of law.

8. With the above direction, Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, with the consent of both the counsel. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.

JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

__________________________________________

Dated: 15.10.2020 sj

1 2004 (1) SCC 769

96

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Writ Petition No.9772 of 2020

Dated: 15.10.2020

sj