Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 836 (AP)

Y. Ramadevi v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2020-12-18

D.RAMESH

body2020
ORDER : D. Ramesh, J. 1. The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking to declare the action of the 2nd respondent's endorsement proceedings Rc. REV-KRRC/38/2019-DT (KRRC)-COLLKRNL, dated 30.01.2020 as arbitrary, illegal and consequently to set aside the same as the same is contrary to section 7(1) of A.P. Wakf Act and consequently direct the respondent authorities to change the status in column no. 6/7 and 8/9 in Weh Adangal, RSR and column no. 6 in 1B (ROR) and to pass other orders. 2. Heard Sri Gudapati Venkateswararao, learned Counsel for the petitioners and of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents. 3. As per the averments in the affidavit, the petitioners have purchased land in an extent of Ac. 5.00 cents in Sy. No. 19, subsequently the same has been sub divided as Sy. No. 19/2 situated at Dinna Devarapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal & District vide registered sale deeds bearing document no. 2126/84 dated 05.4.1984 admeasuring an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents; document no. 2024/84 dated 29.3.1984 admeasuring an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents; document no. 2025/84 dated 29.3.1984 admeasuring an extent of Ac. 1.00 cents and document no. 2125/84 dated 05.4.1984 admeasuring an extent of Ac. 2.00 cents. The 2nd petitioner's husband had purchased the property situated at Sy. No. 19 vide document no. 1453/84 admeasuring Ac. 2.50 cents dated 05.3.1984 which has later been sub divided as Sy. No. 19/3. 4. Infact the said properties originally belong to one Swamy Reddy and after various registered sale deeds, the petitioners have purchased from P. Venkata Krishna Reddy. The total extent of land admeasuring Ac. 59.90 cents in Sy. No. 19 was in possession of Swamy Reddy and they were in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said property. In the year 1969 the Wakf Board has filed O.S. No. 43 of 1969 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kurnool seeking declaration of property situated in Sy. No. 19 as Wakf property and also for possession against the petitioners' vendor and 8 others. The same was dismissed holding that the defendant in the said suits have perfected the title. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 27.10.1969, no appeal has been preferred by the Wakf board and the same was attained finality. Then the 2nd respondent has issued a gazette notification on 01.9.2005 notified the land situated in Sy. The same was dismissed holding that the defendant in the said suits have perfected the title. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 27.10.1969, no appeal has been preferred by the Wakf board and the same was attained finality. Then the 2nd respondent has issued a gazette notification on 01.9.2005 notified the land situated in Sy. No. 19 admeasuring in an extent of Ac. 59.90 cents of Dinna Devarapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal and District which was shown as property belonging to the Wakf institution at serial no. 3035 of the said notification dated 24.10.1963. Assailing the said notification some of the owners of the property has filed W.P. No. 989 of 2007 on the file of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the same was allowed vide its order dated 20.6.2011 with the following order: "Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case however, it is considered appropriate to reserve liberty in the Board to consider all the facts and circumstances including for ascertaining and marshalling documents pertaining to the endowment of this property in favour of the wakf institution; title deeds if any or any other relevant material to support the claim of the Wakf Board as to the title in this property in favour of the wakf institution - "Kottala Mosque"' "Dinnedevarapadu mosque" or "Khasim Sahib mosque"' as the case may be, in Dinnedevarapadu village of Kurnool Mandal and District and after due consideration of such material including the judgment dated 27.10.1969 in O.S. No. 43 of 1969 of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kurnool; the Board may, after issuing notices to the petitioners and other persons in occupation of the properties in Sy. No. 19 of Dinnedevarapadu village, if satisfied, issue a fresh notification and in accordance with law. Alternatively, the Wakf Board may also consider the advisability of filing a civil suit for declaration of its title in respect of this property. The maintainability of such suit or grant of relief(s) therein shall be however decided by the appropriate Court before which it is presented, in accordance with law. Alternatively, the Wakf Board may also consider the advisability of filing a civil suit for declaration of its title in respect of this property. The maintainability of such suit or grant of relief(s) therein shall be however decided by the appropriate Court before which it is presented, in accordance with law. Since the impugned Gazette notification dated 01.9.2005 is declared unsustainable and is quashed by this judgment, the respondent-Board shall not be authorized to pursue proceedings under the Act against the petitioners, on the assumption that the schedule property is property belonging to the wakf until a formal and lawful declaration of the property being wakf property is re-notified in accordance with law". 5. While that being the position, after purchase of the properties by the petitioners, the petitioners have made an application for grant of patta pass books as per ROR Act. Considering the request made by the petitioners, the patta passbooks were granted by incorporating names of the petitioners. The petitioners have also obtained pahanis in column no. 6/7 in which the land has been shown as Inam and column no. 8 it was shown as Government land. As the said rectification has not been rectified, the petitioners have made a representation to the official respondents and in view of that the 4th respondent has conducted an enquiry and submitted a report to the 3rd respondent stating that the petitioners are the owners of the property. More so, the Wakf Board has also submitted a letter on 27.8.2019 stating that they are not owners of the property. Despite the above report submitted by the respondents 3 and 4, the 2nd respondent has not passed rectification of errors in revenue records and questioning the said inaction, the petitioners have filed W.P. No. 20874 of 2019. The same was disposed of at admission stage on 02.01.2020 directing the 2nd respondent to consider the 4th respondent report dated 07.9.2019 and dispose of in accordance with law. 6. Consequent to the directions of this court in W.P. No. 20874 of 2019 dated 02.01.2020, the District Collector has passed the impugned endorsement stating that the land in survey no. 19 of Dinnadeverapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal and District was recorded in resettlement and re-survey register as inam dry and petitioners/inamdars column i.e. 16th column as manager of the time being of Kottala mosque. 19 of Dinnadeverapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal and District was recorded in resettlement and re-survey register as inam dry and petitioners/inamdars column i.e. 16th column as manager of the time being of Kottala mosque. The appellants/petitioners herein are at their liberty to approach the appropriate tribunal for further relief. Questioning the said orders, the present Writ Petition is filed. 7. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has contended that the 2nd respondent without considering the representation made by the petitioner and the relevant documents and without applying his mind the impugned orders are passed. It is not in dispute that the Wakf Board has filed a suit for declaration of the property situated in Sy. No. 19 as Wakf property was rejected by the competent court vide orders dated 27.10.1969 and it became final. Again questioning the gazette notification issued by the 2nd respondent some of the owners have filed the writ petition before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the High Court after elaborate discussion held that the gazette notification issued by the 2nd respondent on 01.9.2005 is unsustainable and at any rate the Wakf Board shall not be authorized to pursue the proceedings under the Act against the proceedings on the assignment that the schedule property is the property belongs to the Wakf until a formal declaration of the property belongs to the Wakf property in accordance with law. In view of the observation of the High Court in the said judgment, it is very clear that unless and until if any competent court declares that the property belongs to the Wakf board, it cannot be treated as properties belongs to the Wakf board. Said writ petition was disposed of on 12.6.2011, the Wakf board has not filed any suit for declaring this property as Wakf property. The present impugned endorsement issued by the Collector on 30.01.2020 giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the tribunal for relief is nothing but contravention of the said judicial pronouncement. In view of the categorical directions issued by this court in W.P. 989 of 2007 pertaining to the lands situated in Sy. No. 19 of Dinnadevarapadu village of an extent of Ac. In view of the categorical directions issued by this court in W.P. 989 of 2007 pertaining to the lands situated in Sy. No. 19 of Dinnadevarapadu village of an extent of Ac. 59.90 cents is not the Wakf property, hence the petitioners requested to set aside the orders dated 30.01.2020 and to give further direction to the 2nd respondent to rectify the status in column 6/7 and 8/9 in web adangals, in RSR and column no. 6 in 1B ROR pertaining to the lands of the petitioners in 19/2 and 19/3 situated at Dinnadevarapadu village, Kurnool Mandal and District. 8. The 4th respondent has filed counter and he has not denied any contentions of the petitioners. More so, he has accepted that the orders passed by this court on 20.6.2011 declaring the notification dated 01.9.2005 is unsustainable and he also accepted that as directed by this Court, the Board has to approach the competent civil court. Accordingly, they have conducted an enquiry and submitted a report on 07.9.2016 and 16.10.2019 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool for change of classification in column no. 6/7 as patta instead of inam and dry in column no. 7/8 noted as Government land in web adangal with regard to survey numbers 19/2 and 19/3 of Dinnadevarapadu village, Kurnool Mandal & District. They have also further stated in their counter that the said Wakf Board, A.P., Vijayawada vide reference no. F. No. 01/KML/WP No. 989/2007 dated 27.8.2019 and 02.01.2020 have reported that the A.P. State Wakf Board has lost the case as per the office record and they have not proceeded for further appeal in the subject writ petition and the land in survey no. 19/2 in an extent of Ac. 5.00 cents is in possession of Smt. Y. Ramadevi, W/o. Adiseshaiah and the land in survey no. 19/3 in an extent of Ac. 2.50 cents is in possession of G. Lakshmidevi, W/o. G. Lakshmi Narayan of Dinnedeverapadu village, Kurnool Mandal and District. Even as per the averments made in the counter, it is very clear that the 4th respondent after conducting a detailed enquiry and also after obtaining the proceedings from Wakf board submitted a report to the 3rd respondent on 07.9.2019 and 16.10.2019 requesting for rectification of revenue records. Even the Wakf board has also has clarified that the issue was already settled by this court in W.P. No. 989/2007 dated 20.6.2011. Even the Wakf board has also has clarified that the issue was already settled by this court in W.P. No. 989/2007 dated 20.6.2011. But the Wakf board has not preferred any appeal against the said orders and as far as the possession of the petitioners is concerned they have also admitted the possession of the petitioners. 9. After hearing both the counsel and perusing the record, I am of the opinion that the impugned endorsement of the 2nd respondent dated 30.01.2020 is nothing but contravention of the orders passed by this court in W.P. No. 989/2007 dated 20.6.2011 wherein the High Court has clearly stated that unless and until, the property is declared in favour of the Wakf Board by the competent court, the board is not competent to claim the said property. Contrary to the said orders, the present impugned endorsement has been issued by rejecting the request made by the petitioners for change of nature of land in column no. 6/7 and 8/9 in web adangal, RSR and Column no. 6 in 1B (ROR) for the land in survey no. 19/2 in an extent of Ac. 5.00 cents and in survey no. 19.3 in an extent of Ac. 2.50 cents of Dinnadeverapadu Village, Kurnool Mandal and District is set aside by declaring that the same is illegal and contrary to the orders of this court in W.P. No. 989 of 2007 dated 20.6.2011. There shall be a further direction to the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders to change the status in column no. 6/7 and 8/9 in web adangals RSR and column no. 6 in 1B (ROR) by considering the orders of this Court in W.P. No. 989/2007 dated 20.6.2011 and also the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 43 of 1969 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kurnool, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order and communicate the same to the petitioners. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.