Aginati Ravi Kumar v. The State of Andhra pradesh ,.p. ty ii

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order or direction or writ, particularly in the nature of Mandamus duly declaring the actron of the respondents 2 to 5 in not returning the petitioners land in Sy No. 640/4A to an extent of Ac. 3.00, at Tallagudem village, Kamepalli Mandal, Khammam District despite the purpose of gift made by the petitioner is no longer exists, as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and against the principles of na.tural justice and consequently, direct the respondents forthwith return the above said land to the petitioner and effect the same in the revenue records as well in the interest of justice lA l,l0: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ctrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petrtion, the High Court may be pleased to injunct the respondents from making any construction or changing the features of the land in Sy No. 640/44 to an extent of Ac. 3.00, at Tallagudem village, Kamepalli Khammam District, in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P RAMA SHARANA SHARMA Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER t/ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.1 7473 ot 2020 ORDER: This writ petition is fiied questioning the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 5 in not returning the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.3.O0 gts in Sy.No.640lAA situated at Taliagudem Village, Kamepalli Mandal, Kharmmam Dist.rict, to the petitoner as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 3. The learned Counsel lor the petitioner submits that the petitioner has donated the sub.lect land ln favour of the respondents for specific purpose of construction of Junior College at Thailagudem in the year, 2OO3 by way of Razinama ln Form-C under A.P.(Telangana Area) and L.R.Rules, 195 l. The 2 SK. .I W.P \o I717:l ol 2O2O respondent authorities have accepted the same and promised to construct the Junior College in the subject land lor the students of Tallagudem Village as well as nearby villages. He submits that as the respondents have not compiied with the specihc condition and they have constructed the Junior College at some other place, the petitioner made application to the respondent No.2-District Collector on 20.O2.l>.O1 0, but no action has been taken. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that once the property was gifted by way of Razinama ald its condition is not complied .,.vith, the landlord is having every right to withdraw the same and as per Rule 23 of Andhra praclesh (Tr:langar_ra Area) Land Revenue Rules, 1951, the registered holder is entitled to withdraw Razinama by submitting application. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that after fiiing of the representation of the 'l i i : I 1 I I 3 SK, J w.P No 17473 ot 2020 petitoner, the respondent No.S has addressed a letter to the respondent No.2 in Rc.No.B/ 141Sl02 dated 16. |2.2OIO stating that the Government Junior College was constructed in Kamepalli village instead of Tallagudem Village and the land donated by the petitoner is free from encroachment and lying vacant and as no relinquishment orders have been passed so far, he requested to accord permission to return back the land of the petitioner as he is a poor person and having no other land for his livelihood. He further submits that in spite of said letter, the respondent No.2 has not taken any action to re_convey the land to the petitoner. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitoner further submits that the petitoner is not a big landlord and despite passing of more than a decade and despite severa-l requests, the respondents failed to return the subject land to the petitoner and in view of the same, the p"6o.r.. liled the instant writ petition and requested -.l SK..I tV. P. No. 17473 ot 2O2O to allow the writ petition by directing the rr:spondents to return the said land to the petitioner. 7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contentions has relied on the following Judgment: 1. The Tahsildar, pollachi Taluk, pollachi r,.,

2. Aginati Ravi Kumar vs. The State of Andhra pradesh ,.p. ty ii"-Jrir,"ip.r secretary, T*::"i ;;;;;. Government o r retan-ga;-, rria.""t" ar. 8' Learneci Assistant Government }rleader for Revenue basing on the counter filed by thc respondent No.4 submits that the petitioner has not specifically stated in whose f,avour the alleged donatiorL of subject land by way of gift was made and the document executed by him. He submits that the petitioner has submitted Razinama Form_C for relinquishment under Rule 16 of Andhra pradesh (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Rulcs. 1951 and the same was acct:pted and r_2O 17 SCC Online M;rd 3J941 22024 SCC Online l.S 4042 5 SK. J W.P.No i 7473 of 2020 the Manda-l Revenue Officer, Kamepally, has issued directions to the then Panchayat Secretary, Khammam vide Memo No.B/ 1415l2OO2 dated 01.O7.2O03 to make necessary entries in the village pahani under Rule 17 of Andhra Pradesh Land Revenue Rules, 1951 and in view of the said proceedings, the land is vested with the Government from the date of accepting the Razinama and as per the revenue records, the land is being treated as Government land and lying vacant and there is no right to restore back the said land' He further submits that the Junior College was constructed in Kamepalli Village and the revenue authorities have a,llotted the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.O.20 gts 1n Sy.No.64O for village park under Palle Prakruthi Vanam Program and the revenue officials have handed over the same to the Gram Panchayat on 21.09.202O and the Gram Panchayat has developed the subject land as park. He further sglxflits that there are no records available pertaining .. I \i\ 6 tU n *.. , ,n ra .r 35ri to the subject land and the petitioner also has not filed the aJleged gift and in view of the r;ame, the writ petition is liabie [o be dismissed. 9. After hearing both sides ald on perusal of the record, this Court is of the considerecl view that the petitioner is owner of land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.3.00 grs in Sy.No.640lAA situated at Tallagudem Village, Kamepalii Mandal, Khammam District and there is no dispute about the owncrship of the petitioner in respect of the said land. For. construction of Junior College at Tallagudem villagr: as well as nearby villages, the petitioner has relinquished his right in the subject land in the year, 21103 and the same would reveal from the Memo Rc.No.B/ l4lS/20O2 dated OL.O7.2OO3 issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kamepally and also the letter addr<:ssed bv the respondent No.5 to the respondent No.2 in Rc.No.B/ t41S/02 dated 16. t2.2OtO. 7 SK, J W. P.No.17473 of 2020

10. The petitioner has donated the subject land by way of Razinama in Form-C under Rule- 16 of the Land Revenue Rules, 1951 for specific purpose of construction of Junior College. But the respondent- authorities have not constructed the Junior College in the donated land and constructed at another village i.e, Kamepalli and therefore the petitioner has made representation to the respondents on 2O.O2.2OIO for restoration of patta in respect of their donated land in Sy.No.640/A. In response to the same, the respondent No.5 has addressed a letter Rc.No.B/ I4l5 l02 dated 16.|2.2OIO to the respondent No.2 and the relevalt portion is as follows:- "l invite kind attention to the reference cited and submit that Sri Bollu Venkateswarlu R/o.Tallagudem H/o. Kamepalli (V) of Kamepall Mandal has submitted an application to donate the land in Tallagudem H/o.Kamepalli Vi age Sy.No.640/AA Acrs.3-00 gts for the construction of Government Junior College. Accordingly the changes have been made in the village pahani occupant column has been I-rlled as Govcrnment Junior College. [,'urther it is submitted that Sri Ramreddy Venkat Reddy Hon'ble MLA the then Sujathanagar Constituency present Hon'ble Minister and the public of Kamepalli Mandal have represented to construct the said college in Kamepalli Mandal llead Quarters and Sri Dammalapati Rangaiah and Sesharah have given consent to donate land in S1'.No.354 and 3,55 over an extent of Acrs:3,OO in Kamepalli Mandal Headquarters. Accordrnglv the pattedars have submitted land , 8 SK, J U P.No.17473 of 2O2O raztnama papers and the District colrector, Khamrnam accorded permission to handover the Iancl to the principal Co.=.r..,tn"nt .t r,.,io. College, Kamepalli. The building ," r_ra .u,.,rri.,g i, the said buildrng. "l"o .or.r"i.r.t"a " Sri Bollu Venkatesq,arlu in his application 4d, cited has requested was not for return back of the Iand since constructed. -because ,f," "o,f.S" In this connection I submit that the land is free from encroachment and l1,ing vacant and as no rclinquishment orders hlve'i,1., pu"""d far,.l therefore request Lo accord permissio" ."t;;;';u"k "o ,ire tand to the applrcant-as he is a poor pcrson and having no othe: land for his lrvelihood". 1n

11. In the counter, the respondents havr3 stated that the land admeasurirrg to an extent of Ac.0.20 gts Sy.No.640 was allotted to village pa-rk under palle Prakruthi Vanam programme artd as the revenue authorities have handed over the same trt the Gram Panchayat on 21 .O7.2O2O, the Gram par.Lchayat has developed the subject land as park. Once ttre petitioner has donated the land for specific purporse ald the respondent No.5 has addressed letter to the respondent No.2 for return/re-convey the land to the ltetitoner as the same was not utilized for specific purpose, without taking any appropriate action basing on the representation of the petitioner, now the land was 9 SK, J W.P.No I 7473 of 2020 allotted for other purpose. The contention of the respondents that the subject land was allotted for other purpose and the petitioner has no right to seek re- convey the iand cannot be accepted and the same is arbitrary and illegal. If the petitoner's Iand was acquired by the respondent authorities under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the petitoner has no right to ask for re-convey the land L2. The petitioner has donated his land for specific purpose i.e. for construction of Junior College, but the respondents have not utilized the said land arld it is vacant. If the respondents want to utilize the donated land for other purpose, they have to inform the same to the petitioner and if the petitioner has not given consent, they have to reconvey the land to him

13. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied on the Judgment o[ Madras High Court in Tahsildar,s case (supra I/ squarely apply to the instant case. The 10 st(..J \\' P. No I7473 oI2020 relevant portion of the said Judgment is as follows: "8. The gtft of tl'Le land tuas giuen for a specific purpose. The construction of school buildirtq in the name of the donor uas the sole object of the gtft. There is a marked difference bettueen acqut;ition of land an.d the demand for reconuegance on account of the faiLure to utilize the lartd for the purpose uhich it u.tas acqui.red and a gift of land for a particttlctr public purpose atrd claim made by the donor for returt't of the land on the ground that the land u,as not used for the particular purpose for uhich it utas gifted. ln case, it. is a com.pulsory acquisition for public purpose, the scope of reconueAance under Section 48-B is uery limited. T'he Gouernmerlt must be satisfied that the land was rtot used .for the specifc purpose and it is not necessa4l .for any other public purpose. Then cnly. the question o.f re conuegance uould aise. Houtet'er, in a case of thi.s nature, tuhen the purpose of gift J'ailed to materialtze, the donor tuould be justified in c:laiming the land back. I-here is tn nght for re coruteyance under Section 4B-B of the Land Acquisition Ac,', 1894. There is only a right to consider the request for re- conuegance. Howeuer, that is rtot the case in crzse ll is a conditional gift for constntction of school building, hospitaL, etc., and on account of subsequent eusnf5 s7 efflux of time, the object is no more in existence. ln case a request is made by the donor on accout-,.t of the non-accornpLishment of the purpose for which gift of 1l SK, J W.P.No.17473 of 2O2O land uas giuen, the Gouemment must consider such request giuing due uteight to the utishes of the donor uhile executing the gtft deed donating the land for the purp os e indicaLe d the re irt.

14. Following the above Judgment, this Court has recently a-llowed the writ petition 1n Aginati Ravi Kumar's case (supra 2).

15. In the instant case, the respondents have not utilized the gifted land for the purpose for which it was gifted. As per the letter dated 16.72.2O1O, the respondent No.5 seeks permission of the respondent No.2 to return back the subject land to the petitioner as he is a poor person and having no other land for his livelihood and as the subject land was not utilized for the purpose of construction of Junior College.

16. The petitioner in the instant writ petition 1S requested to re-convey the subject land as it was not utilized for construction of Junior College in the year, 20lO and the respondents have not taken any approprlate action to re-convey the izrnd to the petitoner and the saicl action of the respondents 1S arbitrar5z ald iltegal. In view of the same, the respondents have to re convey the subject 1and to the petitioner.

17. In view of the above findings, the Writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to re_convey the land admeasuring to arr extent of Ac.3.O0 gts in Sy.No.64O/4.4, situated at Tallagudere Village, Kamepalli Mandal, Khammam District to the.petitioner, within eight (8) weeks from the date of receip,t of copy of this order. No order as to costs.

18. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pcncling in this writ petition, shall stald closed. //TRUE COPY' ,,^y - - SD/.AHMED ABDULLAH KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR t=t SECTIOMOFFICER To, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 The Principal Secretary (Revenue) Secretariat, Hyderabad The District Collector, Khammam District, Khammam. The ReveRue Divisional Officer, Khammam District, Khamnram. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchavat, Thallagudem, Kamepali Mandal, Khammam District. The Tasildar, Kamepali Mandal, Khammam District. One CC to SRI P RAMA SHARANA SHARMA Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. [our] o KKS BS Two CD Copies?+: ti:.., HIGH COURT DATED:02105t2025 ORDER WP.No.17473 ot 2020 oQ 1H E S -r.q 16 (,; o L. 2 0 luru 2o25 'i , /. ..,, .:. DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (*-- 6{ilur \