Provided further that the Special Court shall not allow any review petition and set aside its previous order or judgment without hearing the parties affected.

The Schedule shall constitute the guidelines for the interpretation and implementation of this Act.".

12. Addition of the Schedule "THE SCHEDULE It has come to the notice of the Government that there are organised attempts on the part of certain lawless persons operating individually and in groups to grab either by force or by deceit or otherwise lands belonging to the Government, a local authority, a religious or charitable institution or endowment, including a wakf or other private person. Land grabbers are continuously bogus co-operative housing societies or setting up fictitious claims and indulging in large scale and unprecedented act of fraudulent sales of land through unscrupulous real estate dealer or otherwise in favour of certain section of people, resulting in large scale accumulation of the unaccounted wealth. As public order is also adversely affected hereby now and then by such unlawful activities of land grabbers in the State, particularly in respect of urban and urbanisable lands, it was felt necessary to arrest and curb such unlawful activities immediately by enacting a special law in that regard. As the State Legislature was not then in session and as it was considered necessary to give effect to the above decision immediately the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Ordinance, 1986, was promulgated by the Governor on the 29th June, 1982. This Bill seeks to replace the said Ordinance. The Statement of Objects and Reasons to the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Bill, 1987. Law's delays is an undeniable fact. Matters pending in Civil and Criminal Courts take frustratingly long periods to reach finality. Matters pending in Civil Courts are delayed notoriously for long periods. Even Criminal cases taking long periods for disposal. The observations of Hon'ble Sri Y.V. Chandrachud, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of India, in In Re. The Special Courts Bill, 1978 (quoted in the footnote appended below) highlight the reality. In urban areas due to pressure on land, prices have been constantly soaring high, and taking advantage of this phenomenon, unscrupulous and resourceful persons backed by wealth and following occupied without any semblance of right, vast extents of land belonging to the Government, Local authorities, Wakfs, and Charitable and Religious Endowments and evacuees and private person. In several cases such illegal occupations were noticed in respect of lands belonging to private individuals who are not in a position to effectively defend their possession. In many cases this is being done by organised groups loosely called "Mafia", a distinct class of economic offenders, operating in the cities of Andhra Pradesh. Unless all such cases of land grabbing are immediately detected and dealt sternly and swiftly by specially devised adjudicating forums the evil cannot subside and social injustice will continue to be perpetrated with impunity. If civil and criminal actions are dealt by two separate forums, the desired objective cannot be achieved due to procedural delays. In every case of land grabbing the person responsible is liable in tort and also for criminal action. To remedy this menace it is felt that a Special Court should be constituted with jurisdiction to determine both civil and criminal liabilities and also award sentences of imprisonment and fine in order to advance the cause of justice in the same proceedings without being driven to duplication of litigation, of course taking care of procedural fairness and natural justice. The Special Court which consists of a retired Judge of Supreme Court or retired Chief Justice of a High Court, retired or serving Judges of a High Court and civil servants, serving or retired member of the Indian Administrative Service in the rank of Secretary to Government with experience in revenue matters will entertain only such cases in which the magnitude of the evil demand immediate eradication. Such court will avoid duplication and further the cause of justice, since under existing law, evidence given in a Civil Court cannot automatically be relied upon in a Criminal proceeding. A high powered body like the Special Court, by the very nature of its composition will be the best safeguard to guard against possible miscarriage of justice due to non-application of the existing procedural law for determination of both civil and criminal liability. The Special Court, in exercise of its judicial discretion, will decide what type of cases of alleged land grabbing it should entertain, the guidelines being the extent or the value or the location or other like circumstances of the land alleged to have been grabbed. In respect of matters in which the Special Court is not inclined to proceed with, the District Judge exercising jurisdiction over the area will constitute the Special Tribunal.. The Special Tribunal shall have to follow the procedural law strictly and its jurisdiction is limited only to adjudicating civil liability. With a view to achieving the aforesaid objective, it has been decided to amend the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 by undertaking suitable legislation. As the Legislative Assembly of the State was not then in session and as it was considered necessary to give effect to the above decision immediately the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1986 was promulgated by the Governor on the 16th September, 1986. This Bill seeks to replace the said Ordinance.".

13. Repeal of Ordinance 4 of 1986 The Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1986, is hereby repealed.

1. Short title and extent

1. (I) This Act may be called the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act, 1987.

1. (2) It extends to the whole of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
2. (3) It shall be deemed to have come into force on the 18th September, 1986. 2. Amendment of section 7, Act 12 of 1982 In tlie Ar~dhra Przdesh Land Grabbing (~rdhi- bition) Act, 1982 (hereinafter referrcd to as the princi- pal Act), in sectiou 2, for sub-section (3), the follo~ving sub-sections shall be substituted, namely:-
3. (3) -lt applies to all lands situated within the limits of urban agglomeration as defined in cIaase (n) Gnrral AC~ of section 2 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regula- 33 *f1976. tion) Act, 1976 and a municipality. (3-A) It applies also to any other lands situated in such other awas as the Govern~rent may, having due regard to the urbanisable nature of the lanl, by no'ification, apply. 1. Short title and commencement
   • (I) This Act may be called the Andhra Short tltle, Prodesl~ Land Grabbing (~rohibitian) (Amendment) extent and kt, 1387. commence- ment. 2. Amendment of the Schedule To the principal Act, the following Schedule shall be added at the end, namely :-- "THE SCHEDULE It has come to the notice of the Government that there are organised attempts on the part of certain lawless persons operating individually and in groups to grab either by force or by deceit or otherwise lands belonging to the Government, a local authority, a religious or charitable institution or endowment, including a wakf or other private person. Land grabbers are forming bogus co-operative societies or setting up fictitious claims and indulging in large scale and unprecedented acts of fraudulent sales of land through unscrupulous real estate dealers or otherwise in favour of certain section of people, resulting in large scale accumulation of the unaccoun- ted wealth. As public order is also adversely affected hereby now and then by such unlawful activities of land grabbers in the State, particularly in respect of urban and urbanisable lands, it was felt necessary to arrest and curb such unlawful activities immedic- tely by enacting a special law in that regard. As the State Legislature was not then in session and as it was considered necessary to give effect to the above decision immediately the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Ordinance, 1986, was promulgated by the Governor on the 29th June, 1982. This Bill seeks to replace the said Ordinance. The Statement of Objects and Reasons to the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Bill, 1987. Law's delays is an undeniable fact. Matters pending in Civil and Criminal Courts take frustra- tingly long periods to reach finality. Matters pending in Civil Courts are delayed notoriously for long periods. Even Criminal cases taking long periods for disposal. The observations of Hon'ble Sri Y.V. Chandrachud, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of India, in In Re. The Special Courts Bill, 1978 (quoted in the foot- note appended below) highlight the reality. In urban areas due to pressure on land, prices have been constantly soaring high, and taking advantage of this phenomenon, unscrupulous and resourceful persons backed by wealth and following occupied without any semblance of right, vast extents of land belonging to the Government, Local authorities, Wakfs, and Charitable and Religious Endowments and evacuees and private person. In several cases such illegal occupations were noticed in respect of lands belonging to private individuals who are not in a position to effectively defend their possession. In many cases this is being done by organised groups loosely called "Mafia", a distinct class of economic offenders, operating in the cities of Andhra Pradesh. Unless all such cases of land grabbing are immediately detected and dealt sternly and swiftly by specially devised adjudicating forums the evil cannot subside and social injustice will continue to be perpetrated with impunity. If civil and criminal actions are dealt by two separate forums, the desired objective cannot be achieved due to procedural delays. In every case of land grabbing the person responsible is liable in tort and also for criminal action. To remedy this menace it is felt that a Special Court should be constituted with jurisdiction to determine both civil and criminal liabilities and also award sentences of imprisonment and fine in order to advance the cause of justice in the same proceedings without being driven to dupli- cation of litigation, of course taking care of procedural fairness and natural justice. The Special Court which consists of a retired Judge of Supreme Court or retired Chief Justice of a High Court, retired or serving Judges of a High Court and civil servants, serving or retired member of the Indian Admini- strative Service in the rank of Secretary to Government with experience in revenue matters will entertain only such cases in which the magnitude of the evil needs immediate eradication. Such court will avoid duplication and further the cause of justice, since under existing law, evidence given in a Civil Court cannot automatically be relied upon in a Criminal proceeding. A high powered body like the Special Court, by the very nature of its composition will be the best safe-guard to guard against possible miscarriage of justice due to non-application of the existing procedural law for determination of both civil, and criminal liability. The Special Court, in exercise of its judicial discretion, will decide what type of cases of alleged land grabbing it should entertain, the guidelines being the extent or the value or the loca- tion or other like circumstances of the land alleged to have been grabbed. In respect of matters in which the Special Court is not inclined to proceed with, the District Judge exercising jurisdiction over the area will constitute the Special Tribunal. The Special Tribunal shall have to follow the procedural law strictly and its jurisdiction is limited only to adjudicating civil liability. With a view to achieving the aforesaid objective, it has been decided to amend the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 by under- taking suitable legislation. As the Legislative Assembly of the State was not then in session and as it was considered necessary to give effect to the above decision immediately the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amend- ment) Ordinance, 1986 was promulgated by the Gover- nor on the 16th September, 1986. This Bill seeks to replace the said Ordinance. APPENDIX
     • • Observations of Sri Y.V. Chandrachud, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, in In Re The Special Courts Bill, 1978 : (1979 I SCC 380 at 429). *"The congestion in courts, the mounting arrears and the easy and unconcerned dilatoriness which characterise the routine trials in our courts are well- known facts of contemporary life. They are too glaring to require disputation. Serious-minded symposiums are anxiously occupied in finding ways and means to solve what seems to be an intractable and frustrating problems.". NOTES ON CLAUSES Clause 2:--Sub-section
4. (3) of section 1 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 provides for the application of the Act to all lands situated within the limits of a municipal Corporation or Municipality and to any other land situated in such other areas as the Government may, notify. The areas comprised within a Municipal Corporation or Municipality are limited. Due to heavy influx of people from rural areas into urban areas, the value of lands beyond the limits of Municipal Corporations and Municipalities has escalated enormously with the result it was felt that the area of the operation of the Act should be extended to all the urban agglomera- tions as defined in the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and also to such other land having regard to urbanisable nature of the land. It was noticed that cases of land grabbing have been in the increase mainly in the urban agglomerations. Hence, this clause provides for application of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 to the lands situated within the limits of the urban agglomerations in the State and also such other lands situated in such other areas as the Government may, having due regard to the urbani- sable nature of land by notification apply. Under section 4, the competent authority was entrusted with the work of implementing all decisions of the Special Court. The Special Court is now empowered to record convictions and award sentences and execute its orders. In view of this the definition of 'competent authority' is omitted. Section 4 of the principal Act, prohibits, among other things, grabbing of land belonging to private persons. The scope of "Land belonging to private person" it was felt, should be specified so that the lands belonging to certain classes of persons, namely, evac- uees, military personnel and any other private individual also may be brought within the purview of that definition. Special Court :-Originally the District Judge having jurisdiction over the area concerned was also included as a Special Court where there is no Special Court constituted under section 7 of the principal Act. It is felt that the Special Court should be a high powered body presided over by a retired Supreme Court Judge, or a retired Chief Justice of a High Court and the other members being a retired or a serving Judge of a High Court and a senior member of the Indian Administra- tive Service. Accordingly, it is now proposed to constitute only one Special Court. The term "Special Court" is now suitably modified, Special Tribunal :-The term "Special Tribunal" was not defined in the principal Act. Originally the intention was that where Special Court was not consti- tuted, the District Judge having jurisdiction over the area will function as Special Court. In view of the decision taken now to have a Special Court presided over by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a retired Chief Justice of a High Court, it was felt that the Special Court should not be burdened with all cases of land grabbing and that there should be another separate forum called "Special Tribunal" to deal with the cases not taken cognizance of by the Special Court". The District Judge having jurisdiction over the area will constitute the Special Tribunal. Clause 4:- As it was decided to have only one Spe- cial Court presided over by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a retired Chief Justice of a High Court, it is necessary to dispense with the constitution of more than one Special Court. Accordingly sub- section
5. (1) of section 7 of the principal Act which envisages constitution of more than one Court is suita- bly amended. Sub-section
6. (2) of section 7 has been suitably modified providing for constitution of the Special Court consisting of Chairman and four other members. The Special Court, because of the very nature of its composition, is empowered to regulate its proceedings by evolving its own procedure; not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act or rules to be made thereunder. Provision is made that two members shall form the quorum for any bench of the Special Court and that at any sitting of any bench of the Special Court, either the Chairman or the judi- cial member shall preside. This will ensure decisions being taken in a just and fair manner and there will not be any miscarriage of justice. The regulations made by the Special Court are required to be notified in the Gazette and the substance thereof will have to be exhibited by way of public notice for the information of the general public and this ensures openness in procedural matters. The Special Court is allowed to evolve its own procedure untrammelled by the existing procedural laws in order to ensure that it determines both civil and criminal liability in the same proceedings expeditiously. The procedure evolved by the Special Court should be consistent with the principles of natural justice and fair play and this is the best safeguard against arbitrariness. In sub-section
7. (1) of section 7 of the principal Act it is provided that the Government may constitute many Special Courts as may be necessary. But as already stated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons it was decided to constitute only one Special Court invested with jurisdiction both Civil and Criminal to deal with important cases of land grabbing. How- ever, in cases where the Special Court does not entertain a petition on its being satisfied that it is not a fit case to be taken up, it is open to the petitioner to present the same before the Special Tribunal. The intention in creating one Special Court is that all cases of public importance should go before the Special Court, other cases of less importance may be referred to the Special Tribunal. The Special court is empowered to make regula- tions not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act or rules made thereunder for conducting the cases and regulating the manner of taking decisions. The regu- lations so made are required to be laid before the Legislative Assembly and the same are liable to be modified or annulled in the said Assembly. In order to strengthen the powers of the Special Court it is provided that a Special Court may follow its own procedure which shall not be inconsistent with the principles of natural justice and fair play in the trial of the cases and for recording convictions and awarding sentences and execution of its orders. As the Special Court has to follow its own procedure consistent with principles of natural justice and fair play, the provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, are not made applicable to it. However, while deciding the criminal liability, the offences punishable under the Act shall be tried in a summary way and the provisions in sections 263 to 265 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as far as may be, shall apply to such trial. If for any reason, the Special Tribunal comes to the con- clusion that a particular case is a fit case to be tried by the Special Court, it may transfer the same to the Special Court. The term of office of the Chairman and other members is fixed at two years. Further the Special Court is also empowered to exercise its powers and authority through benches, the constitution of which has been specified. The Chair- man is empowered to transfer cases from one bench to another. Clause 5 :-The Special Tribunal is empowered to take cognizance of cases not seized of by the Special Court. In order to avoid vexatious or frivolous liti- gation, the Special Tribunal is empowered to reject any case without any further enquiry if, prima facie it is of the opinion that the case is frivolous or vexatious. If any case, in the opinion of the Special Tribunal, is fit to be tried by the Special Court, the former may transfer the same recording the reasons, to the Special Court for decision. As the District Judge, exercising jurisdiction over the area shall constitute the Special Tribunal, it was felt desirable that the procedural law contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 should be followed in the trial of cases. For the same reason, the Special Tribunal is not invested with simultaneous jurisdiction to determine civil and criminal liability. Its jurisdiction is exclusively limited to decide civil nature of the liability. The appellate authority over the decisions of the Special Tribunal is the Special Court and an appeal shall lie on questions of Law and fact against the judgment and orders not being interlocutory orders of the Special Tribunal. As regards the binding nature of the decisions of the Special Tribunal, the reasoning mentioned for con- ferring such a power on the Special Court fully applies to the Special Tribunal also. In order to advance the cause of justice, the Special Tribunal is empowered to mould the relief. It can award not only compensation in terms of money but also award profits accrued from the land and direct restoration of land to the rightful owner. In case compensation and profits are awarded to the Govern- ment, in order to ensure quick recovery, the provisions of Revenue Recovery Act are made applicable. In other cases, where the decree holder is not the Government the decree of the Special Tribunal will have to be ex- ecuted like any other decree passed by a Civil Court. As a necessary consequence of the constitution of the Special forums for adjudicating the disputes relating to alleged acts of land grabbing, all cases pending in the Civil Courts will naturally have to go before them. The Special Court, by reason of its composition, can- not be burdened with all the cases. It is, therefore, felt desirable that all such cases should stand transferred to the Special Tribunal exercising jurisdiction over the area and the Special Tribunal is empowered to transfer for reasons to be recorded by it any case for decision to the Special Court. In order to avoid delay in the disposal, it has been decided to fix a time limit of six months and as far as possible, within this period, the Special Tribunal shall dispose of finally every case brought before it. As the District Court is the Special Tribunal, it is conferred with the power of review like other Civil Court exercising powers under the Code of Civil Procedure. Clause 6:-Guidelines have been specified to enable the Special Court to take cognizance of any case, the guidelines being the location, extent or value of the land alleged to have been grabbed or of the substantial nature of the evil involved or in the interest of justice required or any other relevant matter. In the absence of these guidelines, the Special Court will not be in a position to choose the type of cases to be dealt by it. A procedural safeguard is also incorpora- ted to the effect that before taking cognizance of any case the Special Court shall hear the petitioner. This will enable the petitioner to satisfy the Special Court of the guidelines, if there is material, that the case is a fit case to be dealt by the Special Court. As it was decided to confer wide jurisdiction on the Special Court to try and determine in the same procee- dings, civil and criminal liability, it became necessary to incorporate the non-obstante clause to the effect that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1972, the Special Court shall have the aforesaid jurisdiction. Having regard to the guidelines specified and after considering the submissions of the petitioner if the Special Court is of the opinion that any case brought before it is not fit to be dealt by it, it may return the same for presentation before the Special Tribunal. This will lighten the burden of the Special Court, other- wise it will be flooded with large number of cases. In order to pre-empt vexatious or frivolous litigation, power is conferred on the Special Court to reject any application filed before it without any further enquiry if in its opinion prima facie, such an application is frivolous or vexatious. Cases which are either instituted before the Special Tribunal or stand transferred to it under sub-section
8. (6) of section 7A may be of such an important nature falling within the scope of the guidelines specified for determination of cases by the Special Court. All such cases may escape the attention of the Special Court. In such a contingency in the absence of adequate power being conferred on the Special Court to withdraw such cases from the file of the Special Tribunal to its file, justice will not be advanced, unless the Special Court is empowered to withdraw cases from the Special Tribunal. When a Special Court was conceived of as a single forum for the determination of both civil and criminal liability, it must be empowered to try all cases under the Act notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. A non- obstante clause has been incorporated to enable the Special Court to try offences. As a consequence of conferrence of the aforesaid power on the Special Court, the power to make regulations, evolving its own procedure and also having regard to its power to make regulations evolving its own procedure not inconsistent with the principles of natural justice and fair play, sub-sections
9. (3) and
10. (5) of section 8 of the principal Act have been omitted. As the Special Court is invested with both civil and criminal powers, it shall determine the order in which they shall be taken up and it is within its discretion to decide whether the judgment should not be delivered until both the civil and criminal proceedings are com- pleted. It is also provided that the evidence admit- ted during the Criminal proceedings may be made use of while trying the civil liability and additional evidence, if any, adduced in the civil proceedings shall not be considered by the Special Court while determining the criminal liability. The land grabbers being highly sophisticated economic offenders, rich and resourceful will naturally adopt all means and techniques to escape the liability. It is common knowledge that one of the well known methods of defeating the just claims of a decree holder is by setting up third parties in a fresh litigation alleg- ing that the third parties were not parties to the earlier proceedings and so they were not bound by the decree. To surmount this, it was felt necessary that a notifi- cation should be issued by the Special Court specifying the factum of taking cognizance of any case under the Act so that the said notification may serve as notice to the persons interested in the litigation and if they do not come forward within the time specified to file their objections, the finding of the Special Court will become conclusive proof regarding the fact of the land grabbing. The Custodian of the evacuee property also may object to the exercising of the jurisdiction by the Special Court in which case the Special Court will not proceed further in so far as evacuee property is concerned. Advancement of the cause of justice is the founda- tion of the actions for the Special Court. Keeping this in view, it is provided that the Special Court may award compensation in respect of wrongful possession of the land held to have been grabbed and also profits accrued from such land and the liability to make pay- ment will be on the land grabber. The Special Court shall also have power to direct re-delivery of the grabbed land to the rightful owner. In order to ensure swifter implementation of the orders and decisions of the Special Court, it is provided that the amount of compensation and profits and the costs of redelivery shall be recovered as arrear of land revenue in case, the Government is held to be the owner, and in other cases, they will be executed as a decree of civil court. The Special Court itself is empowered to execute the decree passed and orders made by it. In consonance with the principles of natural justice it is provided that before an order is passed by the Special Court directing the land grabber to pay compensation and other costs, he is given an opportunity to make representation. Clause 7 :-The very nature of the composition of the Special Court should not give any scope to any party to circumvent its decisions and orders and defeat the just claims of the persons in whose favour the orders or decisions are given. To ensure this, it is felt that civil and criminal powers should be con- ferred on the Special Court. This clause substitutes new sections 9, 10 and 10A in place of the present sections 9 and 10. It is intended to reduce the rigour of burden of proof under the exist- ing section 10 and shifts the burden of proofs on the alleged land grabber only where there is prima facie proof that the land belongs to Government. New section 10-A is being inserted by this clause. This provision empowers the Chairman of the Special Court to appoint officers and other employees requi- red to assist it in the discharge of its functions under this Act. It is provided that the rules may be made after consulting the Chairman of the Special Court in respect of salaries, allowances and other conditions and the administrative powers of the Chairman. Clause 11 :-This clause inserts new sections 17-A and 17-B. Section 17-A confers power of review on the Special Court. Section 17-B relates to the state- ment of purpose. The Statement of Objects and Reasons and the Notes on clauses reflect the Legislative intention and the purpose for which the legislation is embarked upon. Without referring to the Statement of Objects and Reasons and the Notes on Clauses, any judicial interpretation of any of the provisions of the Act will not reflect the legislative intention precisely. Taking this into account, it is felt that the Statement of Objects and Reasons and the Notes on clauses should constitute guidelines for the interpretation and the implementation of the Act. In order to enable the Special Court to render complete justice uninhibited by technicalities, wide power of review has been conferred on it. It is felt that the existing provisions in the Code of Civil Proce- dure, 1908 relating to power of review are not wide enough to prevent possible miscarriage of justice. With a view to preventing miscarriage of justice and avoiding a routine procedure and allowing justice to prevail, it is felt that the Special Court should be permitted to admit or reject review petitions in circulation without hearing the petitioners. But when once a review petition is admitted, the affected parties will have to be heard before a final decision is taken by the Special Court."." 3. Amendment of the Schedule In the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Second Amendment) Act, 1988, in the Schedule thereof,-
    • (a) under the heading "The Statement of Objects and Reasons to the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Amendment Bill, 1987" for the words "serving or retired Judge of a High Court, serving or retired District Judges", the words "serving or retired Judge of a High Court, serving or retired District Judges" shall be substituted;
    • (b) in the notes on clauses relating to clause (3), under the heading "Special Court" for the words "and other members being two District Judges", the words "and other members being two retired or serving District Judges" shall be substituted. 4. Repeal of Ordinance 8 of 1988 The Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1986, is hereby repealed. 1. Short title and extent
      • (I) This Act may be called the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act, 1987.
11. (2) It extends to the whole of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
12. (3) It shall be deemed to have come into force on the 18th September, 1986. 2. Amendment of section 1, Act 12 of 1982 In tlie Ar~dhra Przdesh Land Grabbing (~rdhi- bition) Act, 1982 (hereinafter referrcd to as the princi- pal Act), in sectiou 2, for sub-section (3), the follo~ving sub-sections shall be substituted, namely:-
13. (3) -lt applies to all lands situated within the limits of urban agglomeration as defined in cIaase (n) of section 2 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regula- tion) Act, 1976 and a municipality. (3-A) It applies also to any other lands situated in such other awas as the Govern~rent may, having due regard to the urbanisable nature of the lanl, by no'ification, apply. 3. TITLE: Amendment of section 2 In section 2 of the principzl Act,-
    • (i) clause
    • (a) shall be omitted;
      • (ii) after clause (c), the following clause shall be insert&, namely :- , "(cc) 'land belonging to a private person' weans any lend belonging to,- (ij an evacuee;
      • (ii) a military personnel; or
      • (iii) any other private individual; The value or the extent of \i.lhich or the nature of the evil involved shall be of substantial &ture or in the interest of justice required:";
      • (iii) for clause (i), the following clauses shall be substituted, nameIy :- "(i) 'Sc.lil-,i LI lc' Ineilns ri Schcdu tc nppendcd to 1i1;s Act; (i-nl 'Spc;. iil l Court' means a Special Court constitu tcd u~tdzl- sect ion 7; (i-b) LSpcc.inl T,-j bunal' means a court of the District Judge Ii;~vjyg. jurisdiction over the arez co~lccrncd and incIud~s Cll~ef Jud~c, City Civil Court, Hyderabad". 4. TITLE: Amendment of section 7 In section 7 of the principal Act,-
      • (i) in sub-section (I), for the words "as many Special Courts as may bc neccssary for such area or areas as may be specified in the notification", the words "a Special Court" shall be substituted;
      • (ii) in sub-section (2), for the words "not more t: ban two other members", the words "four other n iernbers" shall be substituted;
      • (iii) for sub-section (31, the following sub-section s- ball be substituted namely :- "(3) The Chairm~n shall be a person who a Chicf Justice of a High Court or a Judge of the Sq9reme Court and of thc other four members, two :<hlll be pzrsons who are or have been judges of a !High Court (hereinafier referred to as Judicial Mem-'hers) alid the other two ~nembers shall be persons I~J~LO are or have been inembers of the Indian Admini-,strative Service holding or havc held a post not beIow .the rank of Secretary to Government with special 'knowledge or experience in revenuc rnitters (herein-.nrter referred to as Revenue Members): Provided that the appointnlont of a person who was a C!lief Justice of a High Court as the Chairman or a J~~de-e of a High Court as a alcmbzr of the Spe-ciai Cowt sllall be made after consultat ion witb the Chief Justice cf the High Court concerned : Provided further that where a sitting Judge of a High Court is to be appointed as a member, such appointment shall be made after nomination by the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned, with he concurrence of the Chief 3ustice of India.
      • (iv) in sub-section f4), for the words "any Special Court", . the words "the Special Court" shall be substituted; {v) after sub-section (4), the following sub-sections shall be inserted, namely :- "(?A) The Chairman or other member shaU hold officeq such for a term of two years from the date on r,vhicIl he enters upon his oB?ce, or until the Special Court is reconstituted or abolished undzr sub-section (4), whichever is earlier. (4%)
    • (a) Subject to the other provisions 01 this Act, the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Special Court may be exercised by benches thereof one comprising of the Chairman, a judicial membe; and a Revenue member and the other comprising of a judicial Member and a Revenue Member.
    • (b) Where the bench comprises of the Chairman, hc shall be thc Presiding Officer of such a bench and where the bench consisls of two members, the Judicial member shall be the Presiding Officer.
    • (c) It shall be competent for the Chairman either silo motu or an a reference made to him to withdraw any case pending before the bench cornpris-ing of two members and dispose of the same or to transfer any case from one bench to another bench in i.1~ illlerest of justice. Id) Where it is reasonably apprehended that ihe trial of civil liability of a person accused af an offence under this Act, is Iikcly to take considerable timc, it shall bz competent for the Chairman to entrust the trial of the criminal liability of such ofTen-der to anotlier bench in tlie interest of speedy disposal of the case.

(ej Where a case under this Act is heard by a bench consisting of two members aud the rueol-bers thereof are divided in:,opinion, the case with their opinions shall be laid ibefore another judiciaI member or the Chairman and that member or Chair-man, as he case may be after such hearing as he thinks fit, shall deliver his opinion and the decision or order shaII follow that opinion."

1. (vi) for sub-section (5), the following sub-sections slzall be substituted, nainely :-- "(5) The quorun1 to constitute a meeting of any bench of the Special Court shaU be two. (5A) The special Court may, by no~ifimtiou, make regulations not inconsistent with the provisior~s of this Act or the rules made thereunder relating 10 the procedure to bc followed for the conduct of the cases and for regulating the manner of taking deci-sions. (5B) The Special Corirt mxy cause a public notice of tlze substance of such regulations for the jnforrnalioll of the general public. (5C) Every rzguIation made under this section shall, ji~lrnediately after it is made, be laid before the Legislative Assennbly of thc State if it is in session and if it is not iu scssion, in the session in~rnediately following for a tokal period of fourteen days which lilap be comprised in one session or in two successive sessions and if before the expiration of the session in which it is io laid or the ses& immediately foilow-ing the Legislative Assembly agrees in making any modifications in the regulation or in the annulment of the regulation, the regulation shall, from the date on which the modification or annulment is notified, have effect only in such modified form or shall stand annulled, as the case may be; so however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that regulation. (5D)
2. (i) No trvithstanding a~lyi hing in the central AC~ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Special Court may follow its own procedure whicli shall not be inconsis-tent with the- principles of natural justice and fair play and subject to the other provisions of this Act and of any ruIes made thereunder while deciding the Civil liability.
3. (ii) Notwithstanding any thing contained in finmt~~t section 260 or section 262 of the Code of CrinlinaI 2 011974. Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under this Act shall be tried in a summary way and the provi-sions of section 263 to 265 (both inclusive) of the said Code shall, as far as may be, apply to such trial.
4. (iii) When a person is convicted of an offence of land grabbing attended by criminal force or show of force or by criminal intimidation, and it appears to the Special Court that, by such force or show of force or intimidation the land of any person has been grabbed, the Special Court may if it thinks fit, order that possession of the same be restored to that person after evicting by force, if necessary, any other person who may be in possession of the pro-perty.".,
5. (vii) in sub-section (6), for the words "any Special Court", the words "the SpeciaI Court" shall be substituted. 5. TITLE: Insertion of new section Afcer section 7 cT the principal Act, the f'olIow-ing ,.;erution shcll be inscrtcd, namely : -- 7-A.

1. (1) Every Special Tribunal shah have power to try all cases not taken cognizance of by the Special Conl-t relating to any alleged act of land grabbikg, or with I-espect to the ownership and title to, or lawful po;session of the land grabbed svhetller before or after tl~s commencement of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act, 1937 and brought before it and pass such orders (including orders by way of intcl-iin directions) as it deems fit : Provided that if, in the opinion of' the Special Tribunal, any,case brought bcfore it is pt.i?~tcr ,jocic frivolous or vexatious, it shall reject the same without any further enquiry : Provided fr-~~~her that if in '!~u opinion of tllc Spe-cial Tribunzl any case brought- before it is a fit case to be tried by .theaSpecinl Court it Inay for reasons to be recorded by it transfcl. :,he cast: to the Sp4:cial Court for its decision in ;hc matter.
2. (2) Save as otherwise pro~~ided in this Act, a Special Tribunal sllall, in the trial of cases before it, follow the prorcdnre prescribed in the Codc of Civil Procedure, 1908. Ccn:ral ~ct 5 nl' IR(1S.
3. (3) An appeal shall lie, fro111 any judgment or order not being intel-Iacutol-y order of tlle Sp:cial Tribunal, to the Spccial Court or. any qucstiou of Jaw or of fact. Every appeal under this sub-section shall be prefcsred within a period of sixty dzys from the date of Judgmcnl: or order of the Special. Tribunal: Provided that the Special Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of sixty days, if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeaI within the period of sixty days.
4. (4) Every finding of the Special Tribunal with regard to any alleged act of land grabbing shalI be conclusive proof of the fact of land grabbing, and of the persoils who committed such land grabbing and every judgment of the SpecjaI Tribunal \vith regard to the determination of title and ownership to, or lawful possession of, any land grabbed shalt be binding on all persons hnving interest in such land : Provided that the Special Tribunal shall by notifi-cation specify the fact of taking cognizance of the cnsc under this Act. Such notificnt~on sl~all state that any objection wllicll ]nay be recbived by the . Spwial Tribunal froill any person including the custodian of evncucc property within the period specified therein wi,ll be considered by it : Provided fiirthcr that where tbc custodian of evacuee 1,roperty 0b.iect.s to the Special 1 Tribunal taking cognizance of thc ciisc, tile Special Tribunal slla!l 'not nrocezd further with [he case in regard to such prophy : Provided also that rhe Spccial Tribunal shall cause a notice ol taking cognj-ance of the case under the AC~ se~.ilcd on any person known or bclicved to be interestcd in the land, after a summary enquiry to satisfy itse\f about the persons likely ro be interested in the land.
   • (j) Ii shall b< lawful for ihe Special Tribunal to p~.ss ail order in any cnsc dccided bj it, awarding cgmpe~~saiion in terms of money for wrongful posses-siorl, wt~ich shall no: be less than an amount equiya-Iellt to the markct value of tllc land grabbzd as on the date of the order, and profits xccrued from the land payable by the Innd grnbbcr to the owner of the grabbzcl land and may dircct the re-delivery of the gtabbed .land to its rightf~~l owner. Thc amo~int of compeusation and profits so awarded and cost of re-delivery, if any, sl~all be recovered as an arrear of land revenue if thc Government are the owner or as a decree of n Civil Court, in any other case : Provided that 1 he Special Tribuilal shall, before passing lzr~ orderm under this sub-'sectjon, give to the land grabber an oppprtunity of making his represen-ratjou or of adducing evidence, if any, in this regard and consider eve ty such representation and evidence,
5. (6) Any case, pending before any Court or other authority immediately before the commencement of the And hra Pradesh land Grabbing (Prohibiiion) (Amendmeill) Act, 1987 as would have been within the jurisdiction of a Special Tnbunai, shall stand transferred to .the Special Tribunal, having jurisdia tion, as if the cause of aciion on which such suit or proceeding is based had arisen after such commence ment .
6. (7) Every case broudht before the Special Tri-bunal shall be disposed of finally by the Special Tribu-nal, as far as possible, within a period of six months from the date of its having heen brought before it.
7. (8) Tile Specizl Tribunal shall have all the powers of R Civil Court for purposes of review.". 6. TITLE: Amendment of section 8 In section 8 of the principal Act,-
   • (i) in sub-section (1), the proviso shall be omitted;
   • (ii) after sub-section (1), the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely :- "(1A) The Special Court shall, for the purpose of taking cognizance of the case, consider the location, or extent or value of the land alleged to have been grabbed or of the substantial nature of the evil involved or in the interest of justice required or any other relevant matter : Provided that the Special Court shall not take cognizance of any such case without hearing the petitioner.";
   • (iii) in sub-section (2), for the expression "(hereinafter in this section referred to as the 'said Code')", the expression "the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973" and for the words "shall be triable only in a Special Court constituted for the area in which the land grabbed is situated", the words "shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, be triable in the Special Court" shall be substituted :
   • (iv) after sub-section (2), the following sub-sections shall be inserted, namely :- "(2A) If the Special Court is of the opinion that any case brought before it is not a fit case to be taken cognizance of it may return the same for presentation before the Special Tribunal: Provided that if, in the opinion of the Special Court, any application filed before it is prima facie frivolous or vexatious, it shall reject the same without any further enquiry : Provided further that if on an application from an interested person to withdraw and try a case pending before any Special Tribunal, the Special Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to be withdrawn and tried by it, it may for reasons to be recorded in writing withdraw any such case from such Special Tribunal and shall deal with it as if the case was originally instituted before the Special Court. (2B) Notwithstanding anything in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it shall be lawful for the Special Court to try all offences punishable under this Act. (2C) The Special Court shall determine the order in which the civil and criminal liability against a land grabber be initiated. It shall be within the discretion of the Special Court whether or not to allow the civil and criminal proceedings to be completed. The evidence admitted during the criminal proceeding may be made use of while trying the civil liability. But additional evidence, if any, adduced in the civil proceedings shall not be considered by the Special Court while determining the criminal liability. Any person accused of land grabbing or the abetment thereof before the Special Court shall be a competent witness for the defence and give evidence on oath in disproof of the charge made against him or any person charged together with him in the criminal proceeding : Provided that he shall not be called as a witness except on his own request in writing or his failure to give evidence shall be made the subject of any comment by any of the parties or the special court or give rise to any presumption against himself or any person charged together with him at the same proceeding.";
   • (v) sub-sections
8. (3) and
9. (5) shall be omitted;
   • (vi) in sub-section (6), for the words "any Special Court", the words "the Special Court" shall be substituted.
   • (vii) to sub-section (6), the following provisios shall be added, namely :- " Provided that the Special Court shall, by notification specify the fact of taking cognizance of the case under this Act. Such notification shall state that any objection which may be received by the Special Court from any person including the custodian of evacuee property within the period specified therein will be considered by it : Provided further that where the custodian of evacuee property objects to the Special Court taking cognizance of the case, the Special Court shall not proceed further with the case in regard to such property : Provided also that the Special Court shall cause a notice of taking cognizance of the case under the Act, served on any person known or believed to be interested in the land after a summary enquiry to satisfy itself about the persons likely to be interested in the land.".
   • (viii) for sub-section (7), the following sub-section shall be substituted, namely :- "(7) It shall be lawful, for the Special Court to pass such order as it may deem fit to advance the cause of justice. It may award compensation in terms of money for wrongful possession of the land grabbed which shall not be less than an amount equivalent to the market value of the land grabbed as on the date of the order and profits accrued from the land, payable by the land grabber to the owner of the grabbed land and may direct re-delivery of the grabbed land to its rightful owner. The amount of compensation and profits, so awarded and costs of re-delivery, if any, shall be recovered as an arrear of land revenue in case the Government is the owner, or as a decree of a Civil Court, in any other case to be executed by the Special Court : Provided that the Special Court shall, before passing an order under this sub-section, give to the land grabber an opportunity of making his representation or of adducing evidence, if any, in this regard, and consider every such representation and evidence.".
   • (ix) in sub-section (8), the words "having jurisdiction" shall be omitted. 7. TITLE: Substitution of sections 9 and 10 For sections 9 and 10 of the principal Act, the following sections shall be substituted, namely :- Special Court to have the powers of the Civil Court and the Court of Session. 9. Save as expressly provided in this Act, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1972 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, shall apply to the proceedings before the, Special Court and for the purposes of the provisions of the said enactments, Special Court shall be deemed to be a Civil Court, or as the case may be, a Court of session and shall have all the powers of a Civil Court and a Court of session and the person conducting a prosecution before the Special Court shall be deemed to be a Public Prosecutor. 10. Where in any proceedings under this Act, a land is alleged to have been grabbed, and such land is prima facie proved to be the land owned by the Government or by a private person, the Special Court or as the case may be, the Special Tribunal shall presume that the person who is alleged to have been grabbed the land is a land grabber and the burden of proving that the land has not been grabbed by him shall be on such person. 8. TITLE: Amendment of section 12 Amendment 8. In section 12 of the principal Act, for the of section words "No Court" and "Special Court", the words 12. "No Court other than the Special Court" and "Special Tribunal" shall respectively be substituted. 9. TITLE: Amendment of section 14 Amendment 9. In section 14 of the principal Act, for the of section words "the competent authority or", the words "any 14. oflicer or employee of the Special Court or" shall be substituted. 10. TITLE: Amendment of section 17 In section 17 of the principal Act,-
   • (i) for the words "on or after", the words "whether before or after" shall be substituted.
   • (ii) after the words "Special Court" the words "or Special Tribunal" shall be inserted. 11. TITLE: Insertion of new sections After section 17 of the principal Act, the following sections shall be inserted, namely :-