Disposed

Madakam Nandaiah v. Forest Range Officer

Telangana HC10 Nov 2016WP/19594/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of writ petitions by the Gotti Koya community, who migrated from Chhattisgarh to Andhra Pradesh. The Court held that negotiated migration cannot be illegal and the Forest Department must issue notice specifying violations before taking action. High-handed actions like burning huts or cutting wires are disapproved.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Forest Department to issue notice specifying violations of Acts and forbade high-handed action until such notice is acted upon.

Madakam Nandaiah Vs Forest Range Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE A. RAMALI NGESWARA RAO

¶2

Writ Petition Nos.19571, 19594 and 19599 of 2007

¶3

Common Order :

¶4

These Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common order as the issue involved in all the three cases is the same.

¶5

The petitioners belong to Gotti Koya community and claim to have been residing in the Forest Villages of Sunnam Matka, hamlet of Pedda Mattapalli village, Vararamachandrapuram Mandal, Khammam district, Kothuru, hamlet of Sarivela village, Thummala Panchayat, Chintoor Mandal, Khammam District and Therapadu under Chintoor Panchayat, Chintoor Mandal, Khammam District. It is their common case that they originally hail from Chattisgarh State and they migrated to the above villages in August 2005. They could not continue in Chattisgarh State due to the conflict between the Maoists and the Police. They erected huts and surviving there. While so, when their huts were burnt in August 2007, they approached this Court by filing the above Writ Petitions. They state that they have submitted a representation to the respondents 2 and 3 and there was no response from them.

¶6

This Court passed an interim order on 27.09.2007 directing the respondents not to demolish or set fire the huts and the said order has been in operation till today. Seeking vacation of the said order, separate affidavits are filed by the respondents - Forest Officials stating that in Andhra Pradesh State only 33 Tribal groups were officially recognised as Scheduled Tribes and Gotti Koya community is not among them. The Forest Officials in March 2007 noticed the petitioners migrating from Chattisgarh State and trespassing into the Reserved Forest area, occupying the Forest land by clearing Ac.2-00 of Forest land for podu

¶7

ARLR, J WP No.19571 of 2007 and batch

¶8

¶9

cultivation and erecting temporary huts. A case was booked for erection of huts and diversion of Forest land for non-forestry purpose by violating the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967 and Forest Conservation Act, 1980. They were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. The migrated Gotti Koya community tribes are violent, superstitious and revolting in nature. They are in the habit of spoiling the crops of local tribes, kidnapping them and killing them for the purpose of human sacrifice. The provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act, 2006 are not applicable to them.

¶10

The petitioners filed a set of documents along with an affidavit enclosing the copies of NREGA job cards, Rations Cards, Aadhar Cards and other documents in proof of their occupation of land and residence. It is also their case that the Government established Anganwadi Centre in the villages and a private school was also set up. The Integrated Tribal Development Agency dug a bore well to supply drinking water to them. Though an electric pole was put up by the Electricity Department, the Forest Department deliberately cut the wires.

¶11

In view of the above averments, it is clear that the petitioners who are originally from Chattisgarh State, migrated to the State of Andhra Pradesh. Such migration cannot be held to be illegal, but they are subject to the laws of the State. There is evidence to show that the petitioners have been continuing in the respective villages as could be seen from the documentary evidence filed by them. The Forest Department is entitled to take appropriate action in accordance with law, if any provision of the Act is violated. At the same time, if the petitioners seek to continue without violating the law and their continuance is found to be unauthorised, appropriate notice should be given to them before asking

¶12

ARLR, J WP No.19571 of 2007 and batch

¶13

¶14

them to vacate their places, but this Court will not appreciate the burning of huts or removing the electric wires which are provided for the welfare of the people.

¶15

In the circumstances, the respondent - Forest Department through its concerned officer is directed to issue appropriate notice to the petitioners clearly specifying the nature of offence/violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act and Forest Conservation Act and the nature of illegality in their continuance in the places of their occupation and take appropriate action in accordance with law. Till such time, no highhanded action shall be taken against the petitioners.

¶16

All the three Writ Petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶17

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these Writ Petitions shall stand closed.

¶18

____________________________ A. RAMALI NGESWARA RAO, J

¶19

Date: 10.11.2016 Nsr

Madakam Nandaiah v. Forest Range Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madakam Nandaiah v. Forest Range Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surakasula narayana Rao, Vs The District Collector

Koyyalamudi Veera Mohana Rao, Vs The Collector and Land Acquisition Officer

Stapaid Muralaiah Vs The District Collector,Karimnagar

B. devi D/o Dinarayana Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsipatnam

Vanjam Kannaiah Vs Forest Range officer, Vararamachandrapuram (v.R.Puram)

The Antharvedi Agnikula Kshatria Field Labours Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Secretary