NALLA YAKOOB S O BALA GATTAIAH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH REVENUE UC II DEPARTMENT
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
NALLA YAKOOB S/O BALA GATTAIAH
GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADES, H REVENUE (UC.II) DEPARTMENT
Click here to view full judgement.
B.Subhashan Reddy, J. -
(1.)The impugned order dated 18-2-1992 is contrary to the general exemption granted under Section 20 of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 under G.O.Ms.No.733 Revenue (UC-2) Department, dated, 31-10-1988. The excess land in question is 1093 sq.mts. for which exemption was sought for by the petitioner before the issuance of the above G.O.Ms.No.733, dated 31-10-1988. The said application was filed during the year 1983 when the said G.O.Ms.No. 733 was not in existence. But, in view of the issuance of the said general exemption contained in G.O.Ms.No.733, dated 31-10-1988, no permission for exemption is necessary as the land stands exempted automatically under the said G.O. The only question to be considered is whether the said land is within the agglomeration area or peripheral area. This issue has been adjudicated by the competent authority and Special Officer in his proceedings in U.C. Case No. A5/A1/4174/76. There are two issues framed. Second issue is a general issue "as to what relief". The material issue is "Issue No.1" which was framed as stated infra:
"Whether the land in S.No. 234 of Vaddepally is situated outside municipal limits and within peripheral area and deserve deletion for the purpose of computation in terms of G.O.Ms.No.323 M.A. dated 17-5-1977."
The said issue was answered by the Tribunal as mentioned below:
"As per the verification report and the record, the land in S.No.234 of Vaddepally is situated outside municipal limits and within peripheral area, but declarant failed to prove that it is being put to agricultural use and therefore, deserves no deletion for the purpose of computation in terms of G.O. Ms.No.323, M.A. dated 17-5-1977."
(2.)Now the issue, is whether the aforesaid piece of land of 1093 sq. mtrs. is fit to be exempted or is liable to be surrendered as an excess vacant land. In view of issuance of G.O.Ms.No.733, dated 31-10-88, the earlier G.O.Ms.No.323 M.A. dated 17-5-1977 has lost its significance. The liability to surrender the excess land has to be determined now in the context of G.O.Ms.No. 733 Revenue (UC- 2) Department, dated 31-10-1988 and not otherwise. This G.O.Ms.No.733, dated 31-10-1988 has been issued by the Government in exercise of its powers under Section 20(1)(a) of the Urban Lands (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 enunciating a policy to grant exemption of vacant land in the peripheral area as specified in column (3) of Schedule-I to the Urban Lands (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 prescribing a maximum of 5 acres of land, that too, after making provision for roads, open spaces, hospitals and school. This is a general exemption granted not contemplating or making any application By any individual. This exemption is automatic, provided, two conditions are complid; namely, (1) that the land is in peripheral area; and (2) that the maximum extent is five acres exclusive of the land set apart towards roads, open spaces, school and hospital.
(3.)In the instant case, as seen from the above, these two conditions are satisfied. Even, according to the finding of the 3rd respondent, the land is situated in peripheral area and the excess land is only 1093 sq. mtrs., much below the specified maximum extent qualified for exemption. In consequence, the irresistable conclusion is that the petitioner does not hold any excess land and is entitled to retain the said extent of 1093 sq. mtrs. in S.No.234 of Vaddepally village in terms of G.O.Ms.No .733, dated 31-10-1988 and accordingly the order passed by the Ist respondent contained in MemoNo.107712/U.C.II(2)/ 91-1, dated 18-2-1992 is hereby set aside.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.