HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14084 of 2013 Date:20.01.2014 Between:
Rokkam Hemalatha, W/o Jagadeswar Rao and four others.
. Petitioners And:
The District Collector, Visakhapatnam and three others.
. Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Ms Bhagya Lakshmi For Sri M.V.Raja Raam Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not granting regular pattas in favour of the petitioners as illegal and arbitrary.
I have heard Ms Bhagya Lakshmi, the learned counsel representing Sri M.V.Raja Raam, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments).
The petitioners claim that respondent No.2 has granted house site pattas, in the year 2003, in respect of 250 square yards to petitioner No.1 and in respect of 100 square yards each to petitioner Nos.2 to 5. The petitioners further pleaded that from the date of granting pattas, they have been in possession of their respective lands and that respondent No.2 has not been granting regular pattas in their favour, in the absence of which, the authorities concerned have not been entertaining the applications filed by them for grant of permission for construction.
Respondent No.2 filed a counter-affidavit, wherein it is, inter alia, stated that the Visakhapatnam Mandal was bifurcated into Visakhapatnam Urban and Rural Mandals in the year 1989; that Chinagadila Village of Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal comes under the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation limits; that as per the records, Survey No.147 of Chinagadila Village, comprising a total extent of Acs.6.85 cents, is classified as ‘gayalu’ (Government land); that there are no sub- divisions of Survey No.147 of Chinagadila Village; that the original file bearing No.471/2003/Spl.R.I. has been traced out and on verification of the same, it is revealed that house site pattas were granted to 138 families of different Villages at the rate of 60 square yards each in Survey No.7P of Kommadi Village of Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, after obtaining approval of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam; and that no house site pattas were granted to the petitioners. It is further averred that a close perusal of the house site pattas produced by the petitioners would show that they appear to be fake and fabricated and they were not borne by the official record maintained by the Office of the Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal.
At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners, placed before the Court the purported original pattas issued to the petitioners which bear the purported seal of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Chinagadila, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, and ‘09.07.2003’ as the date on which the pattas were granted to the petitioners. If the petitioners’ claim that house site pattas were granted to them is correct, the prayer in the Writ Petition is wholly misconceived as, a reading of these pattas would show that they are not temporary or adhoc. They are described as ‘handing over of residential plot patta’. Neither the learned counsel for the petitioners nor the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has placed before the Court any requirement under the statutory provisions or the executive instructions that further patta in the nature of a final patta needs to be issued. However, there is a serious dispute as to the genuineness of the pattas on which the petitioners have been placing reliance. Such a seriously disputed question of fact cannot be adjudicated in this Writ Petition. The appropriate remedy for the petitioners is to file a civil suit before the competent civil Court for declaration that the pattas granted to them are genuine. If the petitioners are able to secure a decree in that regard, they shall be treated as the owners of the plots and they are entitled to all the statutory permissions required for construction of residential plots thereon.
Subject to the above observations and the liberty given to the petitioners as above, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.Nos.17193 and 40948 of 2013 of 2013 are disposed of as infructuous.
20th January, 2014 DR
JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA
REDDY