APHC010481672013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) Wednesday, the sixth The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Writ Petition No Between: Chokka Istrayya and others The Chief Conservator o Counsel for the petitioner 1. S. Syamsunder Rao Counsel for the respondent 1. G.P. for Forests (A. 2. G.P. for Forests The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ixth day of August two thousand and twenty Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 26622 of 2013 thers ...Petitioners and of Forests and others ...Respondent etitioners: Syamsunder Rao espondents: .P.) made the following: [3311] wenty five Petitioners ...Respondents 2 BSB, J W.P.No.26622 of 2013 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings of the 2nd respondent bearing Rc.No.4488/2013/TO, dated 26.08.2013 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P.Forest Act, 1967 (in short ‘The A.P.Forest Act’) and consequently to direct the respondents not to evict the petitioners from the land in R.S.No. 269, situated at Kalarayanagudem village, Bhogole Block, Lingapalem Mandal, West Godavari District. 2. The case of the petitioners is briefly as follows: The petitioners are permanent residents of Kalarayanagudem village, Lingapalem Mandal, West Godavari District. The 1st petitioner belongs to the schedule caste. The 2nd petitioner belongs to the backward class. Their ancestors were agricultural coolies and mainly depended on the agricultural produce for their livelihood. The petitioners and their ancestors have been cultivating the land in S.No.269 in their village. Kalarayanagudem village is an estate village. It was taken over from the Zamindars after abolition of estates. The Zamindars permitted the petitioners and their ancestors to carry on podu cultivation on payment of makta. Being illiterates, the ancestors of the petitioners did not obtain receipts of makta paid. The said land was treated as communal land meant for the benefit of agricultural coolies in that village. Under the A.P.(A.A.) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (in short ‘the Estate Abolition Act’), survey and settlement operations were conducted. The ancestors of the petitioners were not aware of the same and could not safeguard their possession by filing their objections before the concerned authorities, however, they continued to be in possession. On 09.01.2012 and 18.02.2013, the petitioners and 271 members submitted an application to the 5th 3 BSB, J W.P.No.26622 of 2013 respondent under Section 63 of the Estate Abolition Act requesting to exclude from the notification of the forest department entire Ac.650.00 acres of land in Rs.No.269 in Kalarayanagudem village and to give direction to the concerned authorities to issue Form-D patta to the petitioners and others. When the 2nd to 4th respondents tried to interfere with the possession of the petitioners, they filed suit in O.S.No.81 of 2009 on the file of the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Chintalapudi , West Godavari District for permanent injunction against the 2nd to 4th respondents. The suit was decreed on 08.03.2013 granting permanent injunction and till the defendants are evicted through process of law, if their application for allotment of pattas are not considered. On 11.08.2013, while the petitioners were ploughing the land, the 2nd respondent and his men highhandedly trespassed into the lands of the petitioners and beat them and their coolies, though they had been shown the copy of the decree in the suit. Subsequently, on 13.08.2010, the 2nd respondent served a notice bearing Rc.No.4488/2013/TO, dated 09.08.2013 under Section 20(3) of the A.P.Forest Act to the petitioners to attend on 19.08.2013 for enquiry to finalise and take further course of action. On 08.03.2013 (sic. 08.08.2013), the 2nd respondent and the men seized the tractor of the petitioners beat them and their coolies. As such, the petitioners could not attend before the authority on 19.08.2013. The petitioners complained to the police of Dharmajigudem on 11.08.2013. A case in Cr.No.92 of 2013 was registered against the 2nd respondent and their men. On 04.09.2013, the 2nd respondent served order bearing Rc.No.4488/2013/TO, dated 26.08.2013 directing the petitioners to vacate the land in R.S.No.269 of Kalarayanagudem village. While the application for issue of patta under Section 63 of the Estates Abolition Act is pending before the 5th respondent, ordering the petitioners to vacate the land is illegal and without jurisdiction under the A.P.Forest Act. Moreover, the land in question is not a reserved forest. Unless, a final notification under Section 15 of the A.P.Forest Act is 4 BSB, J W.P.No.26622 of 2013 issued, the prohibition under Section 6 of the A.P.Forest Act would operate. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition was filed. 3. The 3rd respondent filed counter stating that the land in R.S.No.269 of Kalarayanagudem village was part of Bhogole Forest Block notified under Section 4 of A.P.Forest Act. The petitioners are the habitual encroachers of the forest land and forest offence cases were also booked against them. The application made by the petitioners under Section 63 of the Estate Abolition Act to issue Form-D patta cannot be considered as consequent to the notification under Section 4 of A.P.Forest Act, no patta in such land shall be granted by or on behalf of the Government. The suit in O.S.No.81 of 2009 filed by the petitioners was decreed with direction to evict through due process of law. As per Section 20(3) of A.P.Forest Act, the Divisional Forest Officer is a competent authority to evict the encroachers for the encroached forest land after providing an opportunity for the encroachers. Hence, a detailed notice was issued to the petitioners to vacate the forest land. The petitioners have no right over the land. They have not shown any documentary evidence to establish their right over the land in question and have not attended the enquiry. 4. The 3rd respondent filed additional counter-affidavit stating that the Forest Settlement Officer concluded his enquiry and only notification under Section 15 of the A.P.Forest Act is pending or else the entire area would have been declared as reserve forest. This Court in W.P.M.P.No.32938 of 2013 passed an ex parte interim order in this writ petition on 12.09.2013 directing status quo with regard to possession of the subject land shall be maintained and the petitioners shall not cut down any existing tree growth in the subject land. To vacate the interim order of stay granted, the respondent filed a petition on 03.10.2015 which was numbered as W.V.M.P.No.3935 of 2015. Having obtained interim orders, the petitioners failed to observe the condition 5 BSB, J W.P.No.26622 of 2013 mentioned in the interim order by cutting down the existing tree growth and clearing the bushes in the subject land and planted cashew seeding on 25.03.2017. Therefore, the Deputy Range Officer lodged complaint with Dharmajigudem Police Station. Therefore, the 3rd respondent prayed to dismiss the petition. 5. During the course of arguments, it was represented that a similar petition filed in W.P.No.7175 of 2014 filed by other petitioners in possession of land in the same survey number was disposed on 08.01.2024 with the observations and directions as follows: “7. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue has admitted that the said endorsement is genuine one. But however has stated that it is for the Forest Department to initiate further course of grant of pattas under Forest Rights Act, 2006. 8. However, learned Government Pleader for Forests has stated that the said representations though have been addressed to the Revenue Department but the same was not forwarded to the Forest Department. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.” 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of the above order, the petitioners in the present petition also joined the petitioners in W.P.No.7175 of 2014 to submit an application. 7. Ms. B.Sravani, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests, on instructions, submitted that the application is still pending for consideration. She further submitted that unless the petitioners herein or the petitioners in the other writ petition obtain patta under the Estate Abolition Act, the Forest Settlement Officer cannot issue any patta to them, but they failed to obtain patta under the Estate Abolition Act. 6 BSB, J W.P.No.26622 of 2013 8. In any view of the matter, since the application submitted by the petitioners herein and the petitioners in W.P./No.7175 of 2014 is pending for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioners herein requested to dispose of this petition on par with the direction in W.P.No.7175 of 2014. 9. Under the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to pass appropriate order on the representation already submitted by the petitioners herein along with the petitioners in W.P.No.7175 of 2014. Till such time, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the subject property. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt.06.08.2025 PNV