HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT W.P.No. 28397 of 2009 DATE: 19.12.2014 Between:
R. Hemalatha and another .. Petitioners And
1. The District Collector
2. The Revenue Divisional officer
3. The Tahsildar ..
Respondents O R D E R:-
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue.
With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
The petitioners assail Notice No.360/2008/A, dated 10.12.2009 issued by the 3rd respondent calling upon them to handover pattadar passbooks to the 3rd respondent within seven days from the date of issue of notice. It appears from record that the purpose of such direction is to cancel the existing pattadar passbooks and issue fresh pattadar passbooks by reducing the extent of enjoyment of each of the petitioners. The petitioners are two among 30 beneficiaries for assignment of land covered by Sy.No.1-1B7. From the pattadar passbooks filed by the petitioners, it appears that each one of them was assigned Ac.0.86 cents of land with different sub- divisions. The 2nd respondent / Revenue Divisional officer received representation for assignment of land in Sy.No.1-1B7 from a few more beneficiaries who were not assigned or allotted land along with the petitioners. On the representation filed by them, the 2nd respondent directed the 3rd respondent to distribute the available land to 41 beneficiaries instead of 30 beneficiaries/assignees. In order to undertake an exercise on the lines suggested by the 2nd respondent, the impugned notice is issued.
A bare reading of the notice is sufficient to conclude that it is without authority and notice is issued to implement a decision already taken by the 1st respondent. The petitioners have been allotted small extents of Ac.0.86 cents of land each through the District Scheduled Castes Service Cooperative Society Limited, Srikakulam. In recognition of the allotment, the pattadar passbook is issued. Once pattadar passbook is issued, the 3rd respondent will not have jurisdiction to cancel the same on the orders passed by the 2nd respondent. Apart from the above infirmity, as long as the assignment to an extent of Ac.0.86 cents each in favour of the petitioners is subsisting, the 3rd respondent cannot change the extent in pattadar passbooks already issued to the petitioners. The impugned notice suffers from lack of jurisdiction and contrary to A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971.
For the above two reasons the impugned notice insofar as the petitioners are concerned, is set aside.
Hence, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
S.V. BHATT, J
19.12.2014
bcj