TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 1105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Petitions were filed by D. Ramakrishna Reddy and Others assailing the taking over possession of surplus lands from them under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms(Ceiling and Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (Act I of 1973). The specific controversy raised in the cases related to the right of the petitioners to cut and remove trees from the forest area which was a part of the surplus land. The case of the petitioners, as appears from the discussions in the Judgment of the learned Single Judge, was that the forest land, though a part of the surplus land in their hands had not vested in the State Government,and therefore, they were entitled to cut and remove the trees standing on the said land before handing over possession of the land to the State Government. The writ petitioners also pleaded that long before the land was declared surplus with them, they had moved the competent authority of the Forest department for grant of transit permits to them for cutting and removing the standing trees. The authorities sat over the matter and did not issue the requisite transit permit. Therefore, the writ petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the authorities concerned to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plus land vests in the Government free from all encumbrances from the date of the order to take possession which is stated in Form IX notice. On the basis of the above findings, the learned Single Judge held that in the case of categories 1 and 2, i.e. the writ petitioners 1, 2 5, the surplus land had vested in the State in the year 1979 itself, the forest growth on the said land too vested in the State along with the land and no separate compensation or amount is payable on account of such forest growth. In this regard, the learned Single Judge placed reliance on a decision of a Division Bench of the High Court in Writ Appeal Nos. 355-356 of 1982 dated 16.4.1982. Dealing with the case of writ petitioners 3 4 who were included in the third category, the learned Single Judge took the view that the lands proposed to be surrendered by them have not yet vested in the State; in such a situation, there can be no valid objection by the authorities of the Forest department for issuing transit permits. The learned Single Judge directed the forest authorities to issue transit permits in favour of the writ petitioners 3 4 G. Bhoopal Reddy and G. Laxma Reddy(since deceased represented ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That is how these appeals have been filed in this Court. The Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (Act I of 1973), as stated in the Preamble, is an act to consolidate and amend the law relating to the fixation of the ceiling on agricultural holdings and taking over of surplus lands and to provide for the materials connected therewith. Section 2 of the Act contains a declaration that the act is for giving effect to the policy of the State towards securing the principles specified in clause (b) and (c) of Article 39 of the Constitution of India. Section 3 which contains the definitions of certain terms used in the Act provides in clause(c), that 'ceiling area' means the extent of lands specified in Section 4 or Section 4-A to be ceiling area; under clause (j) 'land' means which is used or is capable of being used for purposes of agriculture, or for purposes ancillary thereto, including horticulture, forest land, pasture land, plantation and tope and includes land deemed to be agricultural land under the Act. (Emphasis supplied) Explanations 1 2 to the said sub-Section are not very material for the purpose of the present case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub-Sections(1), (2), (3) (4) which are particularly relevant for the purpose of the present case are quoted hereunder:- (1) If the extent of the holding of a person is in excess of the ceiling area, the person shall be liable to surrender the land held in excess. (2) The Tribunal shall serve on every person, who is liable to surrender the land held in excess of the ceiling area under sub-section (1), a notice specifying therein the extent of land which such person has to surrender and requiring him to file a statement within such period not being less than fifteen days, as it may fix, indicating therein, full particulars of the lands which such person proposes to surrender. (3) If the person on whom a notice is served under sub-section (2), files the statement referred to in that sub-section within the period fixed therefor, and the Tribunal is satisfied, after making such inquiry as it deems fit that the proposed surrender of the land is in accordance with the provisions of this Act, it shall pass an order approving the surrender and the said land shall thereupon be deemed to have been surrendered by such person. (4) If the person on whom a notice is served unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e surrendered. Power is also vested in the Tribunal to itself select the land to be surrendered. Rule 8 sets out the procedure for taking over possession of the land surrendered. In sub-rule (1) of the said rule, it is laid down that the Revenue Divisional Officer may on receipt of a copy of the order passed by the Tribunal under sub-rule (6) of rule 7 in respect of any land surrendered or deemed to have been surrendered by an owner issue an order in Form IX authorising any Officer not lower in rank than a Revenue Inspector to take possession or occupation of such land. Under sub-rule (2), a copy of the order is to be served on the person who has surrendered or is deemed to have surrendered the land and on any other person in possession or occupation of such land. In sub-rule (4), provision is made that where the person concerned fails to voluntarily deliver possession of the land, the officer authorised to take possession of the land may enter upon the land to take possession thereof after removing any obstruction or any unauthorised occupant, on such land if necessary by using such force as he thinks fit and record a certificate in Form X duly attested by two witnesses. Under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said rule are steps to be taken after the surplus land has vested in the State. Vesting of the surplus land in the State is not dependent on taking over physical possession of the land which may be immediately after the vesting or sometimes subsequent thereto. It is our considered view that this conclusion emanates from a harmonious construction of the provisions in section 11 and rule 8 and it is in accord with the object and purpose of the Act. Regarding payment of compensation for the standing trees or any other forest produce on the land vested in the State Government, our attention has not been drawn to any provision in the Act or in the Rules for payment of such sum. Section 15 of the Act makes provision regarding the amount payable for any land vested in the Government under the Act which is to be calculated at the rates specified in the second schedule. Section 16 makes provision regarding claims for amount payable which is to be determined by the Tribunal. In rule 11 is incorporated the provision for fixation of value for fruit bearing trees and structures. There being no provision in the Act or Rules for payment of any sum for the trees (other than fruit bearing trees) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
