9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1987'), The Petitioner Sangham seeks a consequential declaration that its members are landless poor persons and that they are entitled to the benefit of Section 82 of the Act of 1987 in respect of the lands held by them on lease belonging to Sri R.V.B.S. Choultry, Peddapuram, the fifth Respondent. 2. This Court, by interim order dated 21.06.2007, directed status quo obtaining as on that day as to the nature and possession of the lands in question to be maintained for four weeks. The same was extended by two weeks under order dated 28.08.2007 and by a further period of three weeks under order dated 09.10.2007. Thereafter, when the matter was listed for hearing on 30.04.2008 upon the vacate stay petition filed by the fifth Respondent Choultry in WVMP No. 1435 of 2008, this Court, taking note of the fact that there was No. order existing as on that day, observed that the question of vacating the interim order dated 21.06.2007 did not arise. Thereupon, the Petitioner Sangham filed WPMP No. 14567 of 2008 seeking a direction to the Respondents not to interfere with its peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject lands in Survey Nos. 81 to 88 and 171 of Peddapuram Village pend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 009 to vacate the interim order dated 21.04.2009 whereby the benefit of the order dated 06.08.2008 passed in Writ Appeal No. 800 of 2008 was extended in favour of the Petitioner Sangham beyond 30.04.2009. 5. The matter was listed for hearing upon the two vacate applications filed by the fifth Respondent Choultry viz., WVMP Nos. 1435 of 2008 and 2400 of 2009. 6. As copious and comprehensive arguments were advanced by the learned Counsel covering the whole gamut of the controversy raised in the writ petition, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the counsel. 7. It is the case of the Petitioner Sangham that it comprises landless poor farmers and was formed in the year 1977-78. It obtained a lease in respect of the agricultural lands admeasuring Ac. 137.92 cents in Survey Nos. 81 to 88 and 171 of Peddapuram Village belonging to the fifth Respondent Choultry at an annual rental of ₹ 8,000/-. Initially, the Petitioner Sangham is stated to have consisted of 51 members. According to the Petitioner Sangham all its members resolved in the general body meeting held on 05.09.1981 to change the name of the Sangham from 'Sannakaru Rythu Sangham, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... note, the second Explanation to this provision was introduced only in the year 2008. The representation was taken on file by the fourth Respondent as M.A. No. 389 of 2004 and by order dated 22.01.2005, the Petitioner Sangham's request was rejected on the ground that there was No. valid lease in its favour and that it did not fulfill the requirements to be declared as landless poor persons. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner Sangham filed Appeal No. 19 of 2005 before the third Respondent which met with failure when it was dismissed under order dated 16.09.2005. These two proceedings are subjected to challenge in this writ petition. 11. The fifth Respondent Choultry stated in its counter that the amount fixed as the total rent under order dated 06.08.2008 in Writ Appeal No. 800 of 2008 worked out to a meager sum of ₹ 3,774/- per acre and alleged that if these lands were put to public auction they would easily fetch ₹ 8,000/- per acre. The Choultry contended that the Petitioner Sangham was continuing in occupation of its lands without any approved lease and accordingly sought vacation of the order dated 21.04.2009 passed in WPMP No. 10667 of 2009 in W.P. No. 488 of 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nter of the fifth Respondent Choultry, the Petitioner Sangham stated that it had been registered as a Society under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (for brevity, 'the Act of 1860') with Registration No. 631 of 1981 dated 30.11.1981. It placed reliance on the certificates issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Peddapuram, in RC No. 3994/2003 dated 21.09.2003 stating that it's members; had No. other land in Peddapuram, and in RC. No. 3778/2003 dated 07.09.2003 certifying that the landholding of each member of the Petitioner Sangham qualified him/her as a small farmer/landless poor person. It relied upon the finding of the Tenancy Court in ATC No. 27 of 1990 rejecting the stand of the fifth Respondent Choultry that there was a sub-lease between Sannakaru Rythu Sangham and Sri Satyadeva Sannakaru Rythu Sangham and the categorical finding that they were one and the same. Reference is also made to the judgment of the competent Civil Court in O.S. No. 22 of 1996 in this regard. It denied the claim of the fifth Respondent Choultry that its members did not fulfill the requirements to qualify as landless poor persons and contested the approach of the authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pecific finding of the Civil Court that Sri Satyadeva Sannakaru Rythu Sangham was the successor of Sannakaru Rythu Sangham and that only the names had changed but the identity remained the same, would therefore bind the fifth Respondent Choultry. 19. The contention of the fifth Respondent Choultry that No. lease was executed thereafter in favour of the Petitioner Sangham and it could not therefore maintain an application for its members to be recognized as landless poor cultivating tenants under Section 82 of the Act of 1987 cannot be accepted. Though the agricultural lease granted in favour of the Sangham was initially for a period of six years upto 1984-85, under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 it had to be construed to be a lease in perpetuity. It was only under Section 82 of the Act of 1987 that these leases stood cancelled by operation of law. 20. A learned Judge of this Court in Pavuluri Ramaiah v. State of A.P. 1989 (1) APLJ 138 held Section 82 of the Act of 1987 to be unconstitutional. The same was confirmed in appeal by a Division Bench of this Court in Samadhi Narayana v. State of A.P. 1990 (1) ALT 237 (DB) On 29.08.2001, the Supreme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... found on facts that though the name had changed, the members of both the Sanghams were the same; that Sri Satyadeva Sannakaru Rythu Sangham, Peddapuram, was the successor of Sannakaru Rythu Sangham, Peddapuram; and that it continued in possession of the leasehold lands in that status. As the successor Sangham had deposited the rents due before the Tenancy Court, the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Peddapuram, opined that there was No. default in the payment of rents and accordingly dismissed the suit. This judgment attained finality and the issues decided therein would be binding on the parties thereto and cannot be re-opened at this stage, being barred by the principles of res judicata. (Ramchandra Dagdu Sonavane v. Vithu Hira Mahar (2009) 10 SCC 273 and Mohanlal Goenka v. Benoy Kishna Mukherjee AIR 1953 SC 65). Thus, the Petitioner Sangham, being the successor of the earlier Sangham, continued as the lawful lessee of the fifth Respondent Choultry till Section 82 of the Act of 1987 came into force. 24. Dega Babi Reddy v. Government of A.P. 2006 (6) ALT 173, relied upon by Sri V.T.M.Prasad, learned Counsel, is therefore distinguishable on facts as this Court found that the P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal farmers who are not able to purchase the land will continue as tenants provided if they agree to pay at least two third of the market rent for similarly placed lands as lease amount. Explanation:- For the purpose of this Sub-section 'landless poor person' means a person whose total extent of land held by him either as owner or as cultivating tenant or as both does not exceed 1.01,1715 hectares (two and half acres) of wet land or 2.02,3430 hectares (five acres) of dry land and whose monthly income other than from such lands does not exceed thousand rupees per mensum or twelve thousand rupees per annum. However, those of the tenants who own residential property exceeding 200 square yards in urban area shall not be considered as landless poor for the purpose of purchase of endowments property. Explanation-II:- For the purpose of this Sub-section, small and marginal farmers means a person who being a lessee is holding lands in excess of acres 0.25 cents of wet land or acres 0.50 cents of dry land and over and above the ceiling limits of acres 2.50 wet or acres 5.00 dry land respectively they may be allowed to continue in lease subject to payment of 2/3rd of prevailing m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that No. lease was granted in favour of the Petitioner Sangham which was formed with a different name with 56 members and that the initial lease was in favour of the Sannakaru Rythu Sangham with only 51 members. The third Respondent therefore held that the Sangham had failed to prove that a lease was granted in its favour consequent upon the earlier lessee Sangham becoming defunct. Further, the third Respondent held that the extent of Ac. 137.92 cents said to be the leasehold lands of the Sangham was far in excess of the limits prescribed for a landless poor person, thereby disentitling the Sangham to aspire for the benefits of Section 82(2) of the Act of 1987. 29. In so far as the ground relating to the non-existence of a lease in favour of the new Sangham is concerned, in the light of the applicability of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 to the subject lease till the year 1987, the Petitioner Sangham, being the successor-in-interest of the original lessee Sangham, must be deemed to have continued as the lawful lessee of the fifth Respondent Choultry in respect of these lands though the initial lease was only for a period of six years which ended in the year 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on having a distinct legal entity from the members constituting it, in the sense of a company under the Companies Act, 1956 or a society registered under the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964. However, it has its own identity, personality or entity for certain limited purposes which would set it apart from that of its members. It is only under Section 18 of the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 that a society registered thereunder is conferred the status of a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal. This status however was not afforded to societies registered under the Act of 1860. 33. Reference in this regard may be made to the Constitution Bench judgment in Board of Trustees, Ayurvedic and Unani Tibbia College v. State of Delhi AIR 1962 SC 458, wherein the Supreme Court held that on registration under the Act of 1860, the old body of trustees of the college did not become a corporation in the sense of being incorporated within the meaning of Entry 44 of List I and that it remained and continued to be an unincorporated society though under several provisions of the Act of 1860 it had certain privileges, some of which were analogous ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore two fold - one, to protect the interests of the religious or charitable institution or endowment by freeing its lands from leases which were adverse to its interest and which hitherto stood protected by the Tenancy Laws and two, to protect landless poor cultivating tenants who were holding such lands on lease, subject to their fulfilling the conditions stipulated in the provision. 36. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in Bharat Singh v. Management of New Delhi Tuberculosis Centre, New Delhi AIR 1986 SC 842, the objects and reasons give an insight into the background why the Section was introduced and though it cannot be the ultimate guide in interpretation of the statute, it oftentimes aids in finding out what really persuaded the legislature to enact a particular provision. As observed by the Supreme Court. Acts aimed at social amelioration giving benefits to the have-nots should receive liberal construction and it would be the duty of the Court to give such construction to a statute as would promote the purpose or object of the Act. It is a recognized rule of interpretation of statutes that expressions used in a statute should ordinarily be understood in a sense in which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lands does not exceed the stipulated limit. It is further stated therein that those tenants who own residential property exceeding the stipulated limit shall also not be construed to be landless poor persons. The 'small and marginal farmer' mentioned in this provision and now defined in the second Explanation, cannot therefore have reference to a body of farmers as a unit. As the Petitioner Sangham was registered under the Act of 1860 and as it is not conferred with the status of a body corporate for all purposes, it cannot be construed that it had a legal entity apart from and distinct and separate from its members. The Petitioner Sangham could not therefore be tested as a unit to ascertain whether the requirements of Section 82(2) of the Act of 1987 were fulfilled. The individual members thereof, being the actual cultivating tenants, ought to have been the focus for this purpose. The logomachy advanced by the Respondent authorities in this regard militates against the very objective of this ameliorative social legislation. Further, as pointed out by the Supreme Court in Illachi Devi Writ Appeal No. 627 of 2010 dated 08.09.2010, a society registered under the Act of 1860 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vari District, the fourth Respondent, and the order dated 16.09.2005 passed by the Regional Joint Commissioner, Multi Zone-I, Endowments Department, Kakinada, East Godavari District, the third Respondent, confirming the same in Appeal No. 19 of 2005. The fourth Respondent shall consider afresh the application made by the Petitioner Sangham as one submitted individually by its members, existing as on the date of coming into force of the Act of 1987, and shall determine in the context of the certificates issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Peddapuram, and such other material as may be considered relevant, as to whether individually each such member fulfilled the requirements of the Explanations to Section 82(2) o: the Act of 1987 as existing presently. The members of the Petitioner Sangham shall be permitted to participate in this exercise and substantiate their claim by producing relevant proofs in support thereof. The benefit of Section 82(2) of the Act of 1987 shall be extended to ah such members of the Petitioner Sangham who are found to satisfy the statutory requirements to claim the status of a 'landless poor person'/small and marginal farmer. This exercise shall be c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
