Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 485 (AP)

Ch. Sitarama Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2021-07-28

R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

body2021
JUDGMENT The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners 1 to 4. These four petitioners are claiming that they are landless poor persons. The 3rd respondent temple is now seeking to auction the leasehold rights of the lands held by these petitioners as lessees of the 3rd respondent-temple. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that since they are landless poor persons, the 3rd respondent cannot auction the leasehold rights of the lands held by them and that they should be continued as lessees in accordance with the proviso to Section 82(2) of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short “the Act”). 3. Heard Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for 3rd respondent. 4. A perusal of the material placed before this Court would show that the 2nd petitioner has been recognized as a landless poor person by proceedings of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments, Rajahmundry on 31.03.2005. As such, he would be entitled to the benefit of the proviso to Section 82 of the Act and an extent of Ac.1.96 cents of wet land in R.S.No.410/5 of Manepalli Village, P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District held by him, as lessee of the 3rd respondent, cannot be put to auction. 5. As far as the 3rd petitioner is concerned, the said petitioner has not been recognized as a landless poor person in accordance with the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 (for short ‘the Agricultural Land Rules’). The petitioners 1 and 4 claim to be the descendents of persons who have been recognized as landless poor persons, in accordance with the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Lease of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003. 6. Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 3rd petitioner meets all the requirements of a landless poor person and the only defect in his status is that necessary certification has not been obtained at the appropriate time. He further submits that petitioners 1 and 4 would also be entitled to the benefit of the status of a landless poor person, as they are the legal heirs of persons, who have already been recognized as landless poor persons. He further submits that petitioners 1 and 4 would also be entitled to the benefit of the status of a landless poor person, as they are the legal heirs of persons, who have already been recognized as landless poor persons. He further submits that Rule 9 (f) and Proviso to Rule 3(3) of the Agricultural Lands Rules, stipulate that once a person is recognized as a landless poor person, his status cannot be altered except by way of a review by the concerned Assistant Commissioner of Endowments. In the present case, since no such review has been conducted, the status of the ancestors of petitioners 1 and 4 remains that of landless poor persons and petitioners 1 and 4 are entitled for all the benefits available to their ancestors. 7. Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for 3rd respondent would submit that Rule 9(f) has been amended by way of G.O.Ms.No.425 dated 09.11.2015 whereby it was stipulated that where leases are held by landless poor persons, the lease granted to such landless poor persons can be held by legal heirs for the balance period whenever such landless poor persons pass away during the currency of any lease. 8. In the circumstances, he submits that the petitioners can, at best, be entitled for the balance period of the lease given in favour of the deceased landless poor person. He also relies upon Rule 8 of the Agricultural lands Rules, 2003 which states that no lease shall be granted for a period beyond three years and contends that the scheme of the Act and Rules is to grant lease of Agricultural Lands to landless poor persons recognized under Rule 3 for three years, which is to be renewed every three years. In such circumstances, petitioners 1 and 4 would at best have been entitled to continue the lease for the balance period after the demise of the landless poor person, who was holding the lease. 9. They would not be entitled for any continuation of subsequent leases. Consideration of the Court: 10. Section 82(2) and the proviso to Section 82(2) has been considered by the erstwhile High Court of A.P in Merla Venkateswara Rao v. Regional Joint Commissioner, Multi Zone-I, Endowment Department and Ors., 2018 (4) ALT 655 . 9. They would not be entitled for any continuation of subsequent leases. Consideration of the Court: 10. Section 82(2) and the proviso to Section 82(2) has been considered by the erstwhile High Court of A.P in Merla Venkateswara Rao v. Regional Joint Commissioner, Multi Zone-I, Endowment Department and Ors., 2018 (4) ALT 655 . Bandela Peda Satyam v. Regional Joint commissioner, Midti Zone-I, Endowment Department, Kakinada and Ors., 2018 (5) ALD 247 wherein it was held that only the persons who were in actual possession of the lands as lessees of the Endowment Institutions at the time of the act coming into force would be entitled for the benefit of being declared as landless poor persons. I am in respectful agreement with the said judgment. However, I propose to supplement this judgment. 11. The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 was brought in for the purpose of better management of the properties of the institutions and endowments and consequent utilisation of funds. The statement of objects and reasons also set out this requirement. One of the features of the Act was the termination of all leases of agricultural lands by way of Section 82 (2) of the Act. This provision terminated all leases subsisting on the date of commencement of the Act. As this termination of all leases would drastically affect the livelihood of landless poor persons, a provision was made to protect these persons and to provide these persons with an opportunity to purchase the lands, which were being cultivated by them as lessees of the religious institutions. Section 82(2) of the Act provides, these landless poor persons, an opportunity to purchase the lands, which were being cultivated by them, at the prevailing market value subject to the condition that the landless poor persons were in possession of these lands for at least six continuous years prior to the enactment of the Act. In the year 2002 a proviso was added to Section 82(2) of the Act by way of Act 27/2002, with effect from 26.08.2002, providing for continuation of leases of such persons, where these persons are unable to purchase the land. 12. In the year 2002 a proviso was added to Section 82(2) of the Act by way of Act 27/2002, with effect from 26.08.2002, providing for continuation of leases of such persons, where these persons are unable to purchase the land. 12. Once the provision of Section 82 of the Act is read in the background of these events, it would be clear that the protection granted to the landless poor tenants of religious institutions is a one time affair and the benefit of the right to purchase the land is also a one time affair. A significant feature of Section 82 and the proviso is that every landless poor person is not automatically given the right either to purchase the land or to continue as a tenant by virtue of the proviso. The requirement is that a person should first be recognised as a landless poor person and thereafter only those landless poor persons, who were in possession of the land for a period of six years prior to the coming into force of the Act, would be entitled to the benefits of Section 82 (2) or the proviso therein and would be entitled to either to purchase the land at the market value or to continue as tenants. 13. Initially, Section 82(2) of the Act only gave a right to the landless poor tenants to purchase the land. There was no provision of continuing these persons as lessees, if they choose not to purchase the land in their possession or were unable to do so due to lack of financial resources. The legislature by way of an amendment, introduced the proviso to Section 82(2) of the Act in the year 2002 to give these persons the additional benefit of being allowed to continue as lessees of the religious institutions on payment of 2/3 of the market rent payable for such lands. 14. The procedure for the said recognition was set out under Rule 3 of the Agricultural Lands Rules, which came into effect in the year 2003. 14. The procedure for the said recognition was set out under Rule 3 of the Agricultural Lands Rules, which came into effect in the year 2003. Rule 3 of the Rules reads as follows: Rule 3: Determination of Landless Poor Person:- (1) Immediately after coming into force of these rules, if any cultivating tenant claims to be a landless poor person, the Assistant Commissioner having territorial Jurisdiction shall enquire into and decide whether the cultivating tenant is a landless poor person as defined in Section 82 after giving a reasonable opportunity to the cultivating tenant and to the Executive Authority of the concerned institution or Endowment. (2) If the cultivating tenant does not claim to be a landless poor person or if the Assistant Commissioner concerned determines that the cultivating tenant is not a landless poor person, the tenancy will be deemed to have been cancelled with effect from 28.05.1987 and the cultivating tenant shall be regarded as a tenant holding over thereafter. (3) 15. Under these provisions, the application for determination has to be made immediately after the Rules came into force. This would also go to show that the recognition of the status of a landless poor person was a one time affair and not a continuous process that would be applicable even for persons who would otherwise qualify as landless poor persons, where such persons obtain leases of endowment land subsequent to the Endowments Act coming into force or the Agricultural Land Rules 2003. 16. The act is silent as to the rights of descendents of such persons in relation to the status of landless poor persons. Rule 9(f) of Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 throws some light on the manner in which legal heirs to the landless poor persons are to be dealt with under the provisions of the Act and Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003. The said Rule 9(f), after amendment by way of G.O.Ms.No.425, Rev.(Endt.I) Dept., dated 09.11.2015 reads as follows: “The lease is not transferable. However, in the event of the death of the lessee, with the prior permission of the Executive Authority; his legal heirs may enjoy the lease for the balance period on the same terms. The lessee cannot grant a sublease and if granted, it shall be regarded as void. However, in the event of the death of the lessee, with the prior permission of the Executive Authority; his legal heirs may enjoy the lease for the balance period on the same terms. The lessee cannot grant a sublease and if granted, it shall be regarded as void. However, in exceptional circumstances, where landless poor persons are actual cultivators of the land, the particulars have to be recorded in the temple land records so as to recognize them as lessees for the balance period”. 17. This Rule stipulates that where a landless poor person dies during the currency of a lease, the said lease would be continued in favour of the legal heirs of the said landless poor persons for the remaining term of the said lease. 18. The question that would arise is whether the lease available to the landless poor person would be an unlimited lease in terms of time, or it would be limited by time. The proviso of Section 82(2) is silent regarding the period of the lease. However, Section 82(3) stipulates that the lease granted to any person, shall be as may be prescribed. The said prescription is found in Rule 8 of the Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003 which states that no lease shall be granted for a lease exceeding three years and in the event of any lease granted beyond that period, prior permission of the Commissioner would be necessary. This would make it clear that the term of any lease granted to a lessee in relation to agricultural land belonging to religious institutions cannot cross three years, unless specific prior permission is obtained from the Commissioner of Endowments, even before the publication of any notice relating to the auction of such leasehold rights. 19. A conspectus of the above statutory regime clearly shows that a landless poor person recognized under Rule 3 of the Agricultural Lands Rules, 2003, would be entitled to continue as a lessee in the lands in his possession, subject to the condition that he continues to retain the status of a landless poor person. The said status would be subject to review by the concerned Assistant Commissioner for Endowments every three years. 20. The said status would be subject to review by the concerned Assistant Commissioner for Endowments every three years. 20. As long as the landless poor person continues as a landless poor person, he continues as a lessee of the endowment institution subject to payment of 2/3rd of the market rent, which is to be determined from time to time. This lease would have to be taken to be a three year lease which is to be reviewed at the end of every three years. It is significant that the review of the status of the landless poor person is also fixed at the end of every three years. This period appears to have been fixed so that it would be open to the authorities to verify whether the landless poor person is still to be continued in that status at the end of every three years to enable the authorities to take necessary steps in the event of such a person being found to exceed either in his income or the land held by him as stipulated under the Rules and the provisions of Section 82 of the Endowments Act. 21. As far as, the descendents of said landless poor persons are concerned, both the Act and the Rules are silent as to whether such descendants would inherit the status of landless poor person and would be entitled to the benefits of such a status. 22. In the absence of any provision in the Act and Rules, it becomes a matter to deduction from the existing Rules. Rule 9(f) as extracted above, now stipulates that the legal heir of a landless poor person who passes away during the currency of any three year period of lease would be entitled to continue the lease till the end of the lease period. This rule, by implication, is restricting the right of a legal heir of a landless poor person to be entitled to the benefit of such lease only to the extent of the lease period and not thereafter. 23. This can only lead to the conclusion that legal heirs of a landless poor person will not inherit the status of a landless poor person nor be entitled to any of the benefits to such landless poor persons under the provisions of the Act and the Rules. 24. 23. This can only lead to the conclusion that legal heirs of a landless poor person will not inherit the status of a landless poor person nor be entitled to any of the benefits to such landless poor persons under the provisions of the Act and the Rules. 24. In these circumstances, petitioners 1, 3 and 4 would not be entitled for the benefit of being declared as landless poor persons or be extended any of the benefits available to such persons under Section 82 of the Act and the Rules. 25. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in favour of petitioner No.2 who has been declared as a landless poor person and the auction of the leasehold rights of the land held by the 2nd petitioner as lessee, if it has been conducted, is set-aside and the 2nd petitioner shall be entitled to be continued as lessee of the land held by him subject to the provisions of the Act and the Rules. 26. The Writ Petition stands dismissed against the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 for the reasons set out above. 27. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.