THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.20350 of 2011

Dated 28 th September, 2011

Between:

Banoth Krishna

And

…Petitioner

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary for Forest, Secretarait, Hyderabad and others

…Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Pulla Rao Yellanki

Counsel for respondents: AGP for Forests

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 to 4 in seeking to dispossess the petitioner from the property admeasuring Acs.8.23 guntas in Survey Nos.202/3 and 202/8 of Sudhimalla Village, Yellandu Mandal, Khammam District as illegal and arbitrary.

I have heard Sri Pulla Rao Yellanki, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests representing the respondents.

The petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Tribe (Lambada). He claimed to have purchased the above-mentioned land from its lawful owner in the year 1968 and the name of the petitioner was mutated in the revenue records. The petitioner alleged that respondent Nos.3 and 4 have been frequently visiting his land and trying to plant eucalyptus trees unauthorisedly. The petitioner therefore filed the present writ petition aggrieved by the said action.

The Divisional Forest Officer, Kothagudem, respondent No.2, filed a counter affidavit, wherein she has inter alia stated that the land claimed by the petitioner is situated in compartment No.46 of Yellandu Reserve forest, which was notified under Section 18 of the Hyderabad Forest Act, vide State Gazette No.11, dated 21.01.1350 Fasli and that the said land is also part of Pubally Vana Samrakshana Samithi which is formed during the year 1997 under the Community Management Scheme. While denying the claim of the petitioner that a patta was issued, respondent No.2 stated that the Tahasildar/Mandal Revenue Officer, Revenue Inspector, Yellandu and Village Revenue Officer, Sudimalla inspected the land on 26.07.2011 along with local forest officials and orally stated that the land does not belong to the revenue department and that the patta is either fabricated or the petitioner may be claiming the land, which may be located somewhere outside the reserve forest. It is also stated that the Tahsildar, who issued the pattadar passbooks has to demarcate the land for which the pattadar passbooks were issued and fix the boundaries.

At the hearing, it is pointed out that the Tahsildar, who issued the pattadar passbooks, is not impleaded as the respondent.

Considering the fact that the petitioner belongs to ST and is claiming property under a patta, this Court felt the necessity of suo m o t u impleading the Tahsildar, Yellandu, as respondent No.5. Ordered accordingly.

The dispute as could be seen from the respective pleadings revolves around whether the extent of Acs.8.23 guntas of land in Survey Nos.202/3 and 202/8 claimed by the petitioner is part of the reserve forest as pleaded by respondent No.2 or the same falls outside the reserve forest. Till now, none of the respondents have taken the initiative to ascertain this aspect. As opined by respondent No.2, demarcation of the land and fixing the boundaries should be done by the impleaded respondent i.e., Tahsildar, Yellandu. Once this is done, the dispute between the parties can be resolved. Accordingly, this

Court feels that in the interests of justice, respondent No.5 shall undertake survey of demarcation of the boundaries of Acs.8.23 guntas of land in Survey Nos.202/3 and 202/8 in respect of which pattadar passbooks have been issued to the petitioner.

For the above-mentioned reasons, respondent No.5 is directed to conduct survey and demarcate the boundaries after issuing notice to the petitioner and respondent No.2. This exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and result of the survey shall be communicated to the petitioner. After survey, if it is found that the extent of Acs.8.23 guntas of land does not form part of reserve forest, the respondents shall not interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the said land. Conversely, if the land is found to be part of reserve forest, the petitioner shall not have any right over the property in dispute.

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.24678 of 2011 and W.V.M.P.No.3650 of 2011 are disposed of as infructuous.

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

28 th September, 2011 VGB