Chaganti Sampath S/o Buchaiah Vs The State of Telangana

¶1

,

¶2

132521

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH^{DAY OF FEBRUARY} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY FIVE}

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MRS^{JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶8

WRIT PETITION^{NO: 20338 OF 2015}

¶9

Between:

¶10

'1 . Chaganti Sampath S/o Buchaiah,..age 30 Yr!, Oc9 Agrl' Coolie, resident of Motlie Village, Pinapaka Mandal,^{Khammam District}

¶11

Chaganti Buchaiah s/o venkataiah ;^{age 48} Ylf^, .^{occ Agrl. coolie,resident of} Mothl Village, Pinapaka Mandal,^{Khammam District}

¶12

Chaganti Savithri Wio Buchaiah,^{age 40 yrs, Occ Housewife'and Coolie,} residlnt of Mothe Village, Pinapaka^{l\llandal,Khammam District}

¶13

Menthena Venkanna S/o Narsaiah,^{age 35 yrs, occ coolie,residentof Mothe} Village, Pinapaka Mandal, Khammam^District

¶14

Menthena Nagesu S/o Narsaiah, .age^{30 yr!,} 9.cc^{Agrl. Coolie, resident of} Mothe Village,-Pinapaka Mandal,^{Khammam District}

¶15

Menthena Sreenu S/o Narsaiah,^{age 33 yrs, Occ Agrl Coolie, resident of} Mothe Village, Pinapaka Mandal,^{Khammam District}

¶16

Akkireddy Mallikamba w/o Sanjeeva,^{age40. yrs, occ Housewife and coolie,} resident 6f Uotfre Village, Pina[aka^{Mandal, Khammam District}

¶17

Sheru Prathap S/o Adeiah, age^{20 yrs, Occ Agrl Coolie, resident of Mothe} Village, Pinap'aka Mandal, Khimmam^District

¶18

...PETITIONER

¶19

AND

¶20

1 . The State of Telangana, Rep by its^{Prl. Secretaryfor Homefor Telangana} Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶21

The State of Telangana, Rep by^{its Prl. secretary for Forests for Telangana,} Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶22

The Forest Beat Officer, FSO, Rangapuram,^{Pinapaka Mandal Khammam}

¶23

The S.l of Police, Karakagudem Police^{Station Pinapaka Mandal Khammam} Dist.

¶24

...RESPONDENTS

¶25

Petitlon under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court may be} pleased to issue a Writ, direction, or order more particularly one in the nature of

¶26

Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or order/direction commanding^respondentNo 3 and 4 declaring the action of making attempts to^{dispossessthe petitioners} without any laMul authority as illegal and consequentially^{direct the Respondents} not to dispossess the^petitioners from land in Sy.no^{48 of extent of Ac.20-00} situated at Mothe^{revenue village, Pinapaka Mandal, KhammamDistrict.}

¶27

l.A. NO: 1 OF 20 15(WPMP. NO: 26197 0F 2015)

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filedⁱⁿ support of the^petition, the^{High Court may be pleasedto pass} interim orders directing the Respondents not to dispossess the^{petitioners from} land in Sy.no 48 an extent of Ac-20-00 situated at Mothe^{RevenueVillage,} Pinapaka lvlandal, Khammam District in interest of^justice.

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. S RAJ KUMAR

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&4: AGP FOR HOME

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent NO.2&3: AGP^{FOR FORESTS}

¶32

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶33

HON,BLE^{MRSJUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶34

WRIA PETITION No. 20338 0F²⁰¹⁵

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

Heard Sri S. Raj Kumar,^{learned counsel appearing} on behalf of the^petationers, learned^{Assistant Government} Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of^respondent Nos.l and 4 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶37

The petitioners approached the Court seeking^prayer

¶38

as under:

¶39

" ...to issue a Writ, direction, or order more^particularly one in the nature of Writ of^Mandamus or any^other Writ or order/direction commanding respondent Nos.3 and 4 declaring the action of making attempts to dispossess the^petitioners without any lawful authority as illegal and consequentially direct the Respondents not to dispossess the^petitioners from land in Sy.No.48 to an extent of Ac.20-00 situated at Mothe revenue village, Pinapaka Mandal, Khammam District...".

¶40

The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the petitioners have been cultivating podu lands admeasuring Ac.20.00 cents in Sy.No. 48 situated at Mothe Village, Pinapaka Mandal, Khammam District. The forest beat officer and the police authorities are

¶41

2 wP 20338-20 t5

¶42

trying to enter into their land and dig pits with procla iners to obstruct the petitioners from cultivating. The respondent Nos.3 and 4 are claiming that there is a boundary dispute between Revenue and Forest Department. The petitioners submitted a^prajavani complaint to the project Officer, ITDA, Bhadrachalm, who in turn issued letter 11.05.2015 to the Divisional Forest officer, palvancha to conduct a joint survey of forest oFficials. However, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are trying to evict the petitioners from the subject lands. Aggrieved.thereby the petitioners approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶43

R D THE RE ORD

¶44

Thi Cou a ed der on o tn P P N 2 97 f2 5in n 3 of 1 erv! a u d r

¶45

"It rs submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are the owners and pattadars of land in Survey No.4B in an extent of Ac.20.00 situated at Mothe Revenue Village, pinapaka Mandal in Khammam District and they are having pattadar pass books also.

¶46

7

¶47

3 wP 2013E 2015

¶48

I I

¶49

In the circumstances, the respondents shall^not interfere with the possession of the above land without following due^process of law".

¶50

The learned Assistant Government^Pleaderfor Forests appearing on behalf of respondents^{submits that} the writ^petition could be disposed of^{in terms of the} interim orders dated O6.O7.2O18^passed in^W.P.M.P.No. 26L97 of 2015 in W.P. No. 20338 of^{2015 which are in} force as on date and the respondents may^{however be} directed to initiate appropriate action^againstthe petitioners as per the provisions of the Telangana Forest Act, L967 in the event^petitioners encroach^{forest tand} under the guise of the^present orders^{to be passed in the} present Writ Petition.

¶51

The learned counsel appearing on^behalf of^the petitioners does not dispute the said submissions made by the learned Assistant Government^{Pleader forForests,} appearing on behalf of respondents.

¶52

7. Takinq into nsideration

¶53

(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

case,

4

wP_20338-2015

(b) The submissions made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the tearned Assistant Government pleader for Forests, appearing on behalf of the respondents,

¶58

(c) The interim orders of this Court dated 06.07.2015 passed in W.p.M.p. No. 26197 of 2O1S in W.p. No. 20338 of 2O15 which are in force as on date,

¶59

The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to interfere with the possessaon . of the land to an extent of Ac.2O.OO guntas in Sy.No. 4g situated at Mothe Revenue Village, pinapaka Mandal, Khammam District without following due process of law. It is however, observed that under the guise of present orders if the petitioners encroach the forest land, the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate action against the petationers as per the provisions of Tetangana Forests Act, 1967. However, there shafl be no order as to costs.

¶60

As a sequel, the any, pending in the Writ petition miscellaneous petitions, if Thall^{alsg styd ctosed.}

¶61

SD/. T. TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶62

CTION OFFICER

¶63