ORDER
1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to execute sale deeds in favour of the petitioners by receiving the sale consideration of Rs. 1.30 lakhs per acre in respect of the lands in their occupation in Sy.No.600 of Gollapudi village, Krishna District belonging to the first respondent-Darga by declaring the notice No.A1/KST/ 118/84/Rent dated 18-12-1995 issued by the second respondent, as illegal and without jurisdiction.
2. The matter has a chequered career. The petitioners are the tenants of small extents of agricultural lands owned by the first respondent totally admeasuring Ac.15.23 cents, for a considerable length of time, by paying Rs.9,000.00 as Maktha per annum.
3. While so, the tenants requested the first respondent to sell the lands under their occupation. This matter was considered by the Wakf Board and resolution was passed
on 22-1-1985 to sell the above extent to 53 tenants. The said resolution was approved by the Government in notification in G.O. Ms. No. 1272, Revenue (Wakf) Department, dated 8-11-1985 directing sale of the land to fifty three tenants at the rate of Rs.1.30 Lakhs per acre. It was further directed that the sale deeds should be executed and the proceeds thereof be utilised exclusively for the objects of the said wakf institution and for rebuilding the corpus. After issuance of the said Governmental order, Gazette publication was made in Krishna District Gazette on 20-1-1986 by complying with all other formalities. No objections were received from any quarter. On 24-12-1985 the second respondent issued a Memo directing the President, District Wakf Committee, Krishna District to proceed with the preliminaries and deposit the sale proceeds with the Board-the second respondent herein immediately, to enable the second respondent for effecting transfer of the land in favour of the tenants. Since no action was taken by the respondents, and the matter was being subjected to inordinate delay, the tenants filed WP No. 1972 of 1989 seeking a writ of mandamus to implement G.O. Ms. No.1272, dated 8-11-1985 and pass appropriate orders. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 27-8-1991 directing the Government to take a final decision in the matter by fixing time limit. Since there was no response, the tenants filed another Writ Petition No.6924 of 1992 and when it was pending the Government had submitted that the GO was cancelled by G.O. Ms. No.133, Revenue (Wakf) Department, dated 1-2-1992. G.O. Ms. No.133 dated 1-2-1992 was challenged by fifty three tenants in WP No.8063 of 1992. A learned single Judge of this Court by order dated 4-5-1993 allowed the said writ petition, quashing G.O. Ms. No.133, dated 1-2-1992. In the said order, the respondents were directed to proceed with the sale of the land in accordance with law. Even then the matter was not moved, as per the directions of the learned single Judge of this Court, which has become final. Whileso, a notice No.A1/KST/118/84/Rent dated 18-12-1995 was issued to the tenants directing them to pay Rs. 1,000.00 per square yard to the extent of land held by each of the fifty three tenants within fifteen days. The said notices were issued in purported compliance of Memo No. 1097/W.2/94-6, Minorities Welfare (Wakf.2) Department, dated 22-9-1995. The said notices are assailed in this writ petition and consequential relief was sought to direct the respondents to execute the sale deeds in favour of the petitioners.
4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the tenants of the lauds owned by the first respondent-Darga along with some others. They have been cultivating the lands for the past several years. Keeping in view the representation made by the tenants, after following the necessary formalities, the Government directed the Wakf Board and the first respondent to sell the land to the tenants @ Rs.1.30 lakhs per acre. For various reasons it was not effected to and ultimately when the said order sought to be cancelled, the petitioners herein filed WP No.8063 of 1992, which was allowed by this Court directing the respondents to proceed with the sale of the lands in accordance with law. Therefore, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that as the order of the learned Judge of this Court become final, there is no other go for the respondents, except to execute the sale deeds in favour of the petitioners without reference to the value fixed by them in notice dated 18-12-1995, as the value of the land was already fixed by the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 1272. Learned Counsel further submits that in the present writ petition, there are only two petitioners and the relief granted to them in the instant writ petition may also be extended to other tenants who are covered by G.O. Ms. No.1272.
5. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the Government submits G.O. Ms. No.1272 was only an administrative order, and it is always open for the Government to modify or cancel the same, as long as there was no concluded contract between the parties. It is always open to the Government to cancel or modify its earlier orders. Hence this writ petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be rejected. Learned Government Pleader also submits that the property of the Wakf Board has to be put to public use and it has to be sold in a public auction after giving vide publicity to attract more number of purchasers as held in Chenchu Rami Reddy v. Government of A.P., . In the instant writ petition, as the said procedure has not been followed, the issuance of G.O. Ms. No.133, dated 1-2-1992 cancelling the earlier G.O. Ms. No.1272 dated 8-11-1985 cannot be said to be illegal. Moreover, the rate of Rs. 1,000.00 per square yard was fixed on the recommendations made by the sub-Committee appointed by the Government to fix the price of the land and accordingly each of the tenant was directed to pay at the rate of Rs.1,000.00 per square yard in respect of the extent of land held by them. Therefore, the learned Government Pleader submits that there is nothing illegality in issuing G.O. Ms. No.133 dated 1-2-1992 and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. Learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent submits that even though necessary procedure is followed in issuing G.O. Ms. No.1272 ordering the first and second respondents to alienate the land in question in favour of the petitioners at the rate of Rs.1.30 lakhs per acre; yet, the petitioners cannot challenge the impugned notice fixing the price of Rs.1,000.00 per square yard. The money realised is required to be utilised for the object for which the institution was established. Therefore, in order to get more money the notice impugned was issued, which cannot be said to be illegal or without jurisdiction. It is further stated that after the disposing of WP No.8063 of 1992, the petitioners made a representation to the Government voluntarily offering a price of Rs.3.30 lakhs per acre, requesting the Government to direct the concerned authorities to alienate the land in their favour at the rate of Rs.3.30 lakhs per acre. Therefore the question of now directing the respondents to alienate the land in favour of the petitioners at the rate of Rs.1.30 Lakhs per acre does not arise. If the voluntary offer made by the petitioners is accepted it would serve interest of the Institution better.
7. I have considered the respective contentions of the parties.
8. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are the tenants of the land held by the first respondent-Darga and they have been cultivating the said land for the last several years. A decision was taken by the Government on the basis of the recommendation made by the first and second respondents, to sell the subject land at the rate of Rs.1.30 lakhs per acre to fifty-three tenants and accordingly a notification in G.O. Ms. No.1272 was also issued by the Government. However, subsequently, the Government cancelled the said notification by issuing another G.O. Ms. No.133, which was challenged by the tenants by filing WP No.8063 of 1992. This Court by order dated: 4-5-1993 allowed the said writ petition quashing G.O. Ms. No.133, dated 1-2-1992 and in view of this, the earlier G.O. Ms. No.1272 stood revived. Now, the only contention raised by the learned Government Pleader is that the value fixed by the Government is within its jurisdiction, as it was fixed on the basis of the recommendations of the sub-committee appointed by the Government for this purpose. Hence the fixation of price of Rs.1000/- cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. It may be noticed that originally the value of the land was fixed at the rate of Rs.1.30 lakhs per acre vide G.O. Ms. No.1272 in the year 1985. When the said Governmental order was sought to be cancelled, it was challenged by the petitioners by filing WP No.8063 of 1993, which was allowed by this Court. Therefore, the value as fixed by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.1272 stands confirmed and there is no specific direction by this Court either to amend or change the value as fixed in G.O. Ms. No.1272. It may be that, if the land is put to sale by way of public auction, it may fetch more amount. But, if the value fixed by the impugned notice is taken into consideration, it would be Rs.40.00 lakhs per acre. Obviously, this notice was issued by the second respondent only with an ostensible purpose to circumvent the order of the learned single Judge of this Court. The respondents have fixed such an onerous rate so as to disable the petitioners from purchasing the land.
9. The contention of the learned Government Pleader that the land is to be sold by way of public auction cannot be accepted for the reason that the Government and the Wakf Board being the owners of the property, have already accepted to sell the property to the tenants in view of the representation made by them and that the Government and the Wakf Board cannot resile from their earlier offer, when once the value of the property is on ascending order. In fact after the Government had approved the proposal of the Board for sale of the land, gazette notification was published in the District Gazette inviting objections and higher bids. But no objection nor any higher bids were received. Therefore, it cannot also not be said that there was no public offer. I also do not find any infraction of statutory provision. The Government being a State and Wakf Board being instrumentality of State are expected to function fairly and reasonably. The price now fixed by the Government through the impugned notice is prohibitive to disable the petitioners from purchasing the land and that was not the price fixed by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.1272. In those circumstances, the action of the respondents in directing the petitioners/tenants to pay at the rate of Rs.1,000.00 per square yard is highly arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction. It may be that the Government is entitled to revive or modify the orders already issued by it by following the due process of law; but in the instant case, the Government has decided to sell the land to the tenants, but at a highly exorbitant rate, which is not within the reach of the petitioners. But, at the same time, this Court cannot loose sight of the fact the petitioners voluntarily offered a price of Rs.3.30 lakhs per acre after WP No.8063 of 1992 was allowed by a learned single Judge of this Court and the learned Counsel for the first respondent has rightly submitted that they are bound by their own offer. Even though the Government has fixed Rs.1.30 lakhs in the year 1985, the voluntary offer made by the petitioners cannot be ignored. If the petitioners stick to their offer of Rs.3.30 lakhs per acre, the first respondent-institution will be benefited to a large extent sub-serve the benevolent objects of the institution. I see considerable force in the submission made by the learned Counsel for the first respondent. Even though G.O. Ms. No.133 was set aside, restoring G.O. Ms. No.1272, yet, as the petitioners have voluntarily offered Rs.3.30 lakhs per acre, the petitioners now cannot resile from their own offer keeping in view the larger interest of the institution vis-a-vis the benefit they are getting by virtue of the sale of the land in their favour.
10. Under these circumstances, the Memorandum No.1097/W.2/94-6, dated 22-9-1995 issued by Minorities Welfare (Waqf-2) Department of Government of Andhra Pradesh and consequential notice to the petitioners and other tenants is declared as illegal and without jurisdiction. Consequently the writ petition is allowed, directing the respondents to proceed with the sale of the land to the petitioners, as well as other tenants who are covered by G.O. Ms. No.1272, dated 8-11-1995 at the rate of Rs.3.30 lakhs (Rs.Three lakhs and thirty thousands only) per acre. The petitioners and other tenants covered by G.O. Ms. No.1272 shall deposit the required amount before the first respondent-institution within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, further action shall be taken by the first respondent to transfer the land in favour of the petitioners and other tenants covered by G.O. Ms. No. 1272, dated 8-11-1995. In the circumstances, each party is directed to bear their own costs.